Just askin....
APRIL 23, 2010:
Biden predicts economy will create up to 500,000 jobs a month soon
Where exacty ARE these Jobs that old joe promised?.............Oh, I know, it is the repubs fault, right?
On July 14, 2009, President Obama declared the following....
"Now, my administration has a job to do as well, and that job is to get this economy back on its feet, that's my job, and it's a job I gladly accept. I love these folks who helped get us in this mess and then suddenly say, well, this is Obama's economy. That's fine. Give it to me."
It has been given to him...........at the time we had a 9.5% unemployment rate........we are just about the same as we were then.....
and...
Home prices hit a new low in the first quarter of the year...home sales are down again....consumer confidence is down...and gas and food prices are up.
Just sayin.... :spooked:
and the media was going crazy about how bad our economy was back in 2006 when unemployment was at 5% and gas was $3 per gallon....
again, I'm just sayin....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 09, 2011, 01:44:21 PM
Where exacty ARE these Jobs that old joe promised?
Why don't you tell us, Henry? The basis of your economic belief is that cutting taxes for the wealthy will encourage the economy and create jobs. Well, Bush cut taxes for the wealthy and those tax cuts are still active and the economy tanked and, as you so adeptly point out, those jobs are not forthcoming. In light of that seemingly overwhelming evidence, do you still maintain that cutting taxes for the rich produces the results you suggest?
Quote from: Exterminator on June 09, 2011, 01:58:05 PM
Why don't you tell us, Henry? The basis of your economic belief is that cutting taxes for the wealthy will encourage the economy and create jobs. Well, Bush cut taxes for the wealthy and those tax cuts are still active and the economy tanked and, as you so adeptly point out, those jobs are not forthcoming. In light of that seemingly overwhelming evidence, do you still maintain that cutting taxes for the rich produces the results you suggest?
Come on Henery, don't :kickcan: :kickcan: :kickcan: down the road. Tell us what you to know. I know it going to be a great and intelligent discourse. :biggrin:
Quote from: Exterminator on June 09, 2011, 01:58:05 PM
Why don't you tell us, Henry? The basis of your economic belief is that cutting taxes for the wealthy will encourage the economy and create jobs. Well, Bush cut taxes for the wealthy and those tax cuts are still active and the economy tanked and, as you so adeptly point out, those jobs are not forthcoming. In light of that seemingly overwhelming evidence, do you still maintain that cutting taxes for the rich produces the results you suggest?
Well first of all you are always good at sidetracking the original intent of a particular post....
The facts are this.....federal revenue grew AFTER the Bush tax cuts. Perhaps it is our SPENDING that is the culprit.
Also, remember job growth may not have grew, but it did hover around 5%....and that is with the largest attack on American Soil (9/11), the most devasting hurricane to hit America in years (Katrina) and two wars.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 09, 2011, 03:23:13 PM
The facts are this.....federal revenue grew AFTER the Bush tax cuts.
No, it didn't and no matter how many times you repeat that lie or how often, it will never make it true.
QuotePerhaps it is our SPENDING that is the culprit. Also, remember job growth may not have grew, but it did hover around 5%....and that is with the largest attack on American Soil (9/11), the most devasting hurricane to hit America in years (Katrina) and two wars.
Any reasonable, thinking person would eventually come to the conclusion, based on overwhelming, observable evidence, that the entire mantra about cutting taxes on the rich being good for everyone else is absolute and utter bullshit.
Quote from: Exterminator on June 09, 2011, 04:35:44 PM
No, it didn't and no matter how many times you repeat that lie or how often, it will never make it true.
Any reasonable, thinking person would eventually come to the conclusion, based on overwhelming, observable evidence, that the entire mantra about cutting taxes on the rich being good for everyone else is absolute and utter bullshit.
No lies involved here....
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/3/bush-tax-cuts-boosted-federal-revenue/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/3/bush-tax-cuts-boosted-federal-revenue/)
Bush tax cuts boosted federal revenue
From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenues increased by $785 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history...
According to the Treasury Department, individual and corporate income tax receipts were up 40 percent in the three years following the Bush tax cuts...
and I would have to say that any reasonable, thinking person would eventually come to the conclusion, based on overwhelming, observable evidence, that the entire mantra about
raising taxes on the rich being good for everyone else.....because the rich will merely pass on these extra taxes onto the consumer and the middle class......and to think likewise is absolute and utter bullshit....
(sorry for stealing your line, but it fit in with more response perfectly.... :razz: ;) ) If you want to raise the tax on the "super rich" those making $50 million a year...then maybe.........but to raise it on those making over $200,000 per years is ludicrous....THEY are not the rich.....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 09, 2011, 05:03:23 PM
No lies involved here....
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/3/bush-tax-cuts-boosted-federal-revenue/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/3/bush-tax-cuts-boosted-federal-revenue/)
Bush tax cuts boosted federal revenue
From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenues increased by $785 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history...
According to the Treasury Department, individual and corporate income tax receipts were up 40 percent in the three years following the Bush tax cuts...
and I would have to say that any reasonable, thinking person would eventually come to the conclusion, based on overwhelming, observable evidence, that the entire mantra about raising taxes on the rich being good for everyone else.....because the rich will merely pass on these extra taxes onto the consumer and the middle class......and to think likewise is absolute and utter bullshit....
(sorry for stealing your line, but it fit in with more response perfectly.... :razz: ;) )
If you want to raise the tax on the "super rich" those making $50 million a year...then maybe.........but to raise it on those making over $200,000 per years is ludicrous....THEY are not the rich.....
A person who makes $200,000 a year is not rich? Well he or she is richer than about 90% of the rest of the people in this world. Damn how I would have loved to have made just a $100,000 a year for each year I worked. NOT RICH :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: I say what a mooroon. :grin2:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 09, 2011, 05:03:23 PM
[/b]From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenues increased by $785 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history...
Ok, technically, tax revenues did increase but
not as a result of Bush's tax cuts as you suggest and they increased less than expected because of those tax cuts, ergo, the tax cuts affected revenue negatively. I know that it's difficult for simpletons to grasp that there's more involved than simply looking at a dollar figure for revenue growth and making the quantum leap in logic that the cause of that growth must be tax cuts or a wetter than usual spring or a new wart or any other number of completely unassociated circumstances, but there is. I doubt that you're interested in the truth but here it is, in plain English and everyone including the Congressional Budget Office, the Treasury Department, the Joint Committee on Taxation, the White House's Council of Economic Advisers and even a former Bush administration economist agrees that you are wrong. If I have to choose whom to believe; my money is on them: http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/supply-side_spin.html
Nice try, by the way, finding a source that agrees with your fantasy but you really should learn the difference between editorials and facts to avoid making yourself look foolish in the future.
Now where are those jobs that these tax cuts created?
Quote from: Exterminator on June 10, 2011, 07:41:09 AM
Ok, technically, tax revenues did increase
Strike ONE!....and no matter how many times I repeat it....it is STILL NOT a lie... ;)
Quote from: Exterminator on June 10, 2011, 07:41:09 AM
I know that it's difficult for simpletons to grasp that there's more involved than simply looking at a dollar figure for revenue growth
I totally agree there is MUCH more to it than merely cutting taxes........there has to be some strong leadership involved, and there has to be some consumer confidence....
President George W. Bush's 2003 tax cuts generated a massive increase in federal tax revenue and were followed by 52 consecutive months of economic growth. From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenue increased by $780 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. Total federal revenue from 2003 to 2007:2003 -- $1.78 trillion2004 -- $1.88 trillion2005 -- $2.15 trillion2006 -- $2.40 trillion2007 -- $2.56 trillion http://www.mtgriffith.com/web_documents/taxcutfacts.htm (http://www.mtgriffith.com/web_documents/taxcutfacts.htm) There are links to support are from the US Gov Rev, the conference board...read it and it is provided with simple logic. Quote from: Exterminator on June 10, 2011, 07:41:09 AM
http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/supply-side_spin.html (http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/supply-side_spin.html)
Nice try, by the way, finding a source that agrees with your fantasy but you really should learn the difference between editorials and facts to avoid making yourself look foolish in the future.
And I would say that YOU are the one being somewhat foolish to believe EVERYTHING YOU read, I say YOU TOO find sources to agree with YOUR fantasies also.......I find it very fascinating that the "factcheck.org" is owned by the..
ANNENBERG Public Policy Foundation a leftist organization...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2104053/posts (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2104053/posts)
and ironcily Barack Obama served on the Board of Directors for Annenberg....along with Bill Ayers who had affiliations with this group...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Annenberg_Challenge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Annenberg_Challenge)
Quote from: Exterminator on June 10, 2011, 07:41:09 AM
Now where are those jobs that these tax cuts created?
Like I said before, you MUST have consumer confidence and good leadership, along with TAX CUTS.....with the reckless spending, a healthcare that is being challanged as unconstitutional, Oil over $100 a barrel, and only 28% of Americans who think that the U.S. Heading in
Right Direction economicly....
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_or_wrong_track (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/right_direction_or_wrong_track)
I know you like to think that you are suppierior over other people, but it does not take a "rocket scientist" to see what happens when some simple common sense is put back into place....such as Reagan did.
and just using a source you thought was worthy....The Director of the Congressional Budget Office Doug Elmendorf recommends extending the Bush Tax Cuts before the Senate Budget Committee....
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/congressional-budget-office-recommends-extending-bush-tax-cuts (http://www.mrctv.org/videos/congressional-budget-office-recommends-extending-bush-tax-cuts)
Hey....just sayin.... :razz:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 10, 2011, 10:20:33 AM
President George W. Bush's 2003 tax cuts generated a massive increase in federal tax revenue...
This is an outright lie. Bush's tax cuts had nothing to do with the increase in revenues and resulted in lower than expected increases.
Quote from: Exterminator on June 10, 2011, 10:55:33 AM
This is an outright lie. Bush's tax cuts had nothing to do with the increase in revenues and resulted in lower than expected increases.
Can you prove this is a lie?....and to say it had NOTHING to do with the increase in revenue is foolish...imo.
Show me where this increase in federal revenue came from.....
I really am interested ex......prove to me, that those tax cuts had NOTHING to do with it.
I know there has got to be a certain level of taxes that has to be paid.....I think common sense dictates that if it is too high it will hurt the economy and to low it also hurts.......finding the correct level is what I am interested in.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 10, 2011, 11:48:15 AM
Can you prove this is a lie?....and to say it had NOTHING to do with the increase in revenue is foolish...imo.
Show me where this increase in federal revenue came from.....
I really am interested ex......prove to me, that those tax cuts had NOTHING to do with it.
I know there has got to be a certain level of taxes that has to be paid.....I think common sense dictates that if it is too high it will hurt the economy and to low it also hurts.......finding the correct level is what I am interested in.
OK Henery tell us how George W. never turned down one bill the Republican Party gave him and why did he leave a Trillion dollar plus deficit. Huh? There was not one good bill that came out during the George W. Bush term as President. Nothing but killing of our men and women to two wars and the killing of the American workers.
I think you should find something else to talk about other than George W. Bush. The stupidest and dim witted president American ever had. What is so great you voted for the dumbass two times. :jester:
Quote from: The Troll on June 10, 2011, 11:59:42 AM
OK Henery tell us how George W. never turned down one bill the Republican Party gave him and why did he leave a Trillion dollar plus deficit. Huh? There was not one good bill that came out during the George W. Bush term as President. Nothing but killing of our men and women to two wars and the killing of the American workers.
I think you should find something else to talk about other than George W. Bush. The stupidest and dim witted president American ever had. What is so great you voted for the dumbass two times. :jester:
Troll, this has nothing to do with my original post....How am I supposed to discuss anything with you?...you always get sidetracked and just slam repubs.
You are so biased, it is pointless....
You are a funny guy, who I enjoy on here, MOST of the time....but, you need to open your mind a "little".....and TRY to comprehind what others have to say.
BUMP....getting back on topic....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 09, 2011, 01:44:21 PM
Just askin....
APRIL 23, 2010:
Biden predicts economy will create up to 500,000 jobs a month soon
Where exacty ARE these Jobs that old joe promised?.............Oh, I know, it is the repubs fault, right?
On July 14, 2009, President Obama declared the following....
"Now, my administration has a job to do as well, and that job is to get this economy back on its feet, that’s my job, and it’s a job I gladly accept. I love these folks who helped get us in this mess and then suddenly say, well, this is Obama’s economy. That’s fine. Give it to me.”
It has been given to him...........at the time we had a 9.5% unemployment rate........we are just about the same as we were then.....
and...
Home prices hit a new low in the first quarter of the year...home sales are down again....consumer confidence is down...and gas and food prices are up.
Just sayin.... :spooked:
and the media was going crazy about how bad our economy was back in 2006 when unemployment was at 5% and gas was $3 per gallon....
again, I'm just sayin....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 10, 2011, 11:48:15 AM
Can you prove this is a lie?....and to say it had NOTHING to do with the increase in revenue is foolish...imo.
Show me where this increase in federal revenue came from.....
I really am interested ex......prove to me, that those tax cuts had NOTHING to do with it.
If you were really interested and had bothered to read the link I provided, it is explained very clearly. The increases in revenue had
nothing to do with Bush or those tax cuts; they were consistent with the "40-year historical average as a percentage of gross domestic product." In other words, similar increases in revenue were happening most every year prior to those tax cuts. What those tax cuts did was lower the amount of the increase compared to earlier years so the tax cuts had a
negative overall effect on revenue, not a positive one as you claim.
Consider it this way...let's say that you have a 401K at work into which you put 5% of your income. Let's say that every year you get a raise so your contribution increases every year. Now let's assume that you lower your withholding to 4% at the same time you get your annual raise and that that raise is large enough to more than cover the decrease in your withholding from 5% to 4%. In this scenario, your withholding increased despite your having lowered the percentage, not because of it much in the same way that the increase in federal revenue increased despite Bush's tax cuts, not because of them.
Quote from: Exterminator on June 10, 2011, 12:33:51 PM
If you were really interested and had bothered to read the link I provided, it is explained very clearly. The increases in revenue had nothing to do with Bush or those tax cuts; they were consistent with the "40-year historical average as a percentage of gross domestic product." In other words, similar increases in revenue were happening most every year prior to those tax cuts. What those tax cuts did was lower the amount of the increase compared to earlier years so the tax cuts had a negative overall effect on revenue, not a positive one as you claim.
Consider it this way...let's say that you have a 401K at work into which you put 5% of your income. Let's say that every year you get a raise so your contribution increases every year. Now let's assume that you lower your withholding to 4% at the same time you get your annual raise and that that raise is large enough to more than cover the decrease in your withholding from 5% to 4%. In this scenario, your withholding increased despite your having lowered the percentage, not because of it much in the same way that the increase in federal revenue increased despite Bush's tax cuts, not because of them.
I will say I do follow your logic on this....and can somewhat agree with it. But to say the tax cuts had NO positive effect on the economy is ludicrious.....
Here is another article I have read, that you should give it a quick read....it even supports your view that the Bush Tax Cuts does not deserve the credit many claim it should....it does discuss other intangibles that must be included.
Read this (when you get a chance) and tell me what you think....
One thing that kind of bounces off your theory is.......
Raising taxes from 28% in 1989, to 39% in 1994 can in fact reduce the taxes collected. Tax collections went from 8.3% of the GDP in 1989 to 7.8% in 1994. The tax revenue increased from $1028.4 (billions) to $1356.5, a 31.9% increase. Because of economic growth, inflation, and other variables we could assume with the old 28% tax rate the tax revenues would have been around $1,443.5 or a 40.3% increase.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 10, 2011, 01:04:08 PM
But to say the tax cuts had NO positive effect on the economy is ludicrious.....
Which is why I never said it.
QuoteOne thing that kind of bounces off your theory is.......
I've seen numbers that refute this but don't have time to look for them now...again...
Did you mean to link to an article or was it the article out of which your quotation was made?
Quote from: Exterminator on June 10, 2011, 03:06:25 PM
Which is why I never said it.
I've seen numbers that refute this but don't have time to look for them now...again...
Fair enough....
Quote from: Exterminator on June 10, 2011, 03:06:25 PM
Did you mean to link to an article or was it the article out of which your quotation was made?
Whoops, I thought I attached the link...
http://www.floridapoliticalpress.com/2011/05/23/does-raising-personal-taxes-increase-federal-revenues/ (http://www.floridapoliticalpress.com/2011/05/23/does-raising-personal-taxes-increase-federal-revenues/)
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 10, 2011, 03:28:25 PM
Fair enough....
Whoops, I thought I attached the link...
http://www.floridapoliticalpress.com/2011/05/23/does-raising-personal-taxes-increase-federal-revenues/ (http://www.floridapoliticalpress.com/2011/05/23/does-raising-personal-taxes-increase-federal-revenues/)
The Florida Political Press, it you want the truth and with no biases, you go to The Florida Political Press and The Fox New News Network.
The first thing you do when you go to one of Henery's websites like the Florida Political Press go to the top of it and go over to "About us". You will see that it the brain storm of two Tea Party activist.
When I see something like a Teabagger Rag information website, I go to the top of my computer screen and click the red X. There is nothing for a intelligent person to read. It's all bullshit. :thumbsup:
Quote from: The Troll on June 12, 2011, 02:56:41 PM
The Florida Political Press, it you want the truth and with no biases, you go to The Florida Political Press and The Fox New News Network.
The first thing you do when you go to one of Henery's websites like the Florida Political Press go to the top of it and go over to "About us". You will see that it the brain storm of two Tea Party activist.
When I see something like a Teabagger Rag information website, I go to the top of my computer screen and click the red X. There is nothing for a intelligent person to read. It's all bullshit. :thumbsup:
and you go to the liberal press....MSNBC and Huff post....
I never claimed it was gospil, nor am I disputing what they had to say....I makes very good sense. Also, I was wondering EX's opinion on it....
and finally, at least "I" provide a source to base "MY" opinion....I just don't listen to what Chris Matthews and his flunkies have to say, then "parrot" it...
bottom line Mr. Troll........You REALLY need to listen to what ol' henery has to say and take it to heart.....I say, I say, you just MIGHT learn a thing or two from this ol chicken hawk.. :razz: :wink: ;D
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 12, 2011, 07:52:46 PM
and you go to the liberal press....MSNBC and Huff post....
I never claimed it was gospil, nor am I disputing what they had to say....I makes very good sense. Also, I was wondering EX's opinion on it....
and finally, at least "I" provide a source to base "MY" opinion....I just don't listen to what Chris Matthews and his flunkies have to say, then "parrot" it...
bottom line Mr. Troll........You REALLY need to listen to what ol' henery has to say and take it to heart.....I say, I say, you just MIGHT learn a thing or two from this ol chicken hawk.. :razz: :wink: ;D
Men and women of the Unknown Zone if you ever think I listening to what Henery is saying and I am taking it to heart, call my wife and have me committed to the nearest Looney Bin. Damn thinking of something like that makes me sick. :puke:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 12, 2011, 07:52:46 PM
and you go to the liberal press....MSNBC and Huff post....
I never claimed it was gospil, nor am I disputing what they had to say....I makes very good sense. Also, I was wondering EX's opinion on it....
and finally, at least "I" provide a source to base "MY" opinion....I just don't listen to what Chris Matthews and his flunkies have to say, then "parrot" it...
bottom line Mr. Troll........You REALLY need to listen to what ol' henery has to say and take it to heart.....I say, I say, you just MIGHT learn a thing or two from this ol chicken hawk.. :razz: :wink: ;D
I am not a fan of Chris Matthews, he's getting worse than Phil Donahue. He won't let a guest finish a statement and he put on his Energizer Bunny drum and beats and beats and beats it until your head hurts. I do like the Ed Show.
Guess what Keith Olbermann is coming back this month on the Current Network (satellite) How this one man I trust and like. He sure know the asshole Republican's way and rats them out on every nasty thing they do. If you would listen to him I know it would clear your head a little, not much. :grin2:
Henery you need to get your head out of the Elephants ass and watch Keith for a while it might clear up your head of all of that Republican elephant shit. :pink: :pink: :pink: :pink: :biggrin:
Quote from: The Troll on June 13, 2011, 09:05:39 AM
Henery you need to get your head out of the Elephants ass and watch Keith for a while it might clear up your head of all of that Republican elephant shit. :pink: :pink: :pink: :pink: :biggrin:
Keith is nothing more than the democrats version of Rush....except Rush is usually right and Olberman is normally wrong...THAT is why Olberman is gone and Rush has been around for about 25 years and STILL on top.... :yes:
just sayin... ;D :razz: :pink:
Rush is a fat, lying, hypocritical, misogynistic, racist fuck. The world would be a better place if someone put a bullet in his fat head. Of course, I mean that in the nicest way.
Quote from: Exterminator on June 13, 2011, 10:38:06 AM
Rush is a fat, lying, hypocritical, misogynistic, racist fuck. The world would be a better place if someone put a bullet in his fat head. Of course, I mean that in the nicest way.
and of course I "took" it in the nicest way.... :razz:
Quote from: Exterminator on June 13, 2011, 10:38:06 AM
Rush is a fat, lying, hypocritical, misogynistic, racist fuck. The world would be a better place if someone put a bullet in his fat head. Of course, I mean that in the nicest way.
I agree with you 110%. Rush is a fat ass scum bag. Bankrupt 3 times and his mind is shot up with Oxycontin. :rolleyes: :razz: And he don't hear too well because of it. Hee, hee, hee I say he's one big fat ass druggie. :yes: :biggrin:
Quote from: The Troll on June 13, 2011, 12:48:01 PM
I agree with you 110%. Rush is a fat ass scum bag. Bankrupt 3 times and his mind is shot up with Oxycontin. :rolleyes: :razz: And he don't hear too well because of it. Hee, hee, hee I say he's one big fat ass druggie. :yes: :biggrin:
and I think it is just sour grapes...............I see it as you, Troll are extemely jealous of the noteriety of Rush and his powerful influence he has on this country...so, you fall into the line with the rest of the "sheeple" who does not like what he stands for and merely try at your best to demean him...
I rarely listen to him, but when I have listened to him, he is entertaining and very interesting. When he makes a claim, he is usually correct. He has stood the test of time....if there was anything REAL bad with him, he would have gone away, years ago.....instead, he gets more and more popular and his show continues to grow.....he is second to noone in the political commentary world.....he is "on loan from God"....and it cracks me up when folks like yourself.......try to slam him.....it really is funny.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 13, 2011, 12:54:20 PM
...instead, he gets more and more popular and his show continues to grow...
Because stupid people breed more than smart people.
Quote from: Exterminator on June 13, 2011, 01:01:01 PM
Because stupid people breed more than smart people.
So that is what happened in 2006 and 2008!!??!!!.... :confused: :spooked: ........ahhhh, now it all makes sense... :yes: :razz:
Keep telling yourself that. Case in point, you have 5 kids, I have none. :razz:
Quote from: Exterminator on June 13, 2011, 01:09:40 PM
Keep telling yourself that. Case in point, you have 5 kids, I have none. :razz:
Then without a doubt, I now know for a FACT, that I am considerably smarter than you are. I could/would not trade one of my children for ALL of the money in the world..............if having them makes me part of the stupid crowd in your eyes....then case and point in my favor, hand down.
just sayin though.... :razz: ;)
Like I said, keep telling yourself that. People in third world counties use kids as a form of life insurance. They share their food with them when the kids are young in the hope that the kids will return the favor when they get old.
I just bought my kid a Tahoe... :biggrin:
(http://keithgrossman.com/axtahoe.jpg)
I have to agree with you, Henry.
That is, about the "notoriety" thing-- you know, how Limbaugh has this notoriety that you mentioned.
'Cuz, ya know, the synonyms for notoriety are "ill-repute, disrepute, shame, and infamy."
All of those describe his character to a "T."
Don't you hate it when literacy makes you its bitch? :biggrin:
Quote from: Exterminator on June 13, 2011, 01:52:25 PM
Don't you hate it when literacy makes you its bitch? :biggrin:
I say it looks like, I say it looks like little Henery has dug himself another hole. :dig: I say a large hole. Hee, hee, hee. :chick:
Quote from: followsthewolf on June 13, 2011, 01:48:41 PM
I have to agree with you, Henry.
That is, about the "notoriety" thing-- you know, how Limbaugh has this notoriety that you mentioned.
'Cuz, ya know, the synonyms for notoriety are "ill-repute, disrepute, shame, and infamy."
All of those describe his character to a "T."
The dictionary says the following:
the quality or condition of being notorious; the state of being generally or publicly known.
Quote from: The Troll on June 13, 2011, 02:44:24 PM
I say it looks like, I say it looks like little Henery has dug himself another hole. :dig: I say a large hole. Hee, hee, hee. :chick:
I'm not thinking you are anyone to speak on literacy... ;) .........just sayin... :razz:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 13, 2011, 02:51:01 PM
I'm not thinking you are anyone to speak on literacy... ;) .........just sayin... :razz:
Hey Pal I never claimed to be a brain like you. I have always thought that it was better to be underestimated than overestimated. That way I don't turn out like a fool like you do. :wink: Just saying. :rolleyes: :razz:
But Henery I know you don't like CNN, but tonight at 8:00PM there will be a Republican debate to prove who the biggest fool and nut. You got to tune in to this circus. Dumber meets Dumber. Or like the song "Bring in the Clowns" :biggrin:
Quote from: The Troll on June 13, 2011, 04:41:51 PM
Hey Pal I never claimed to be a brain like you. I have always thought that it was better to be underestimated than overestimated. That way I don't turn out like a fool like you do. :wink: Just saying. :rolleyes: :razz:
But Henery I know you don't like CNN, but tonight at 8:00PM there will be a Republican debate to prove who the biggest fool and nut. You got to tune in to this circus. Dumber meets Dumber. Or like the song "Bring in the Clowns" :biggrin:
Hey, I never claimed to be no brain either.. :no: ..and as much as I would like to watch the fiasco... :spooked: .......I will be help coachin my son tonight in a Little League game.. :yes: ...having fun instead of getting tick off... ;) ;D
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 13, 2011, 05:04:10 PM
Hey, I never claimed to be no brain either.. :no: ..and as much as I would like to watch the fiasco... :spooked: .......I will be help coachin my son tonight in a Little League game.. :yes: ...having fun instead of getting tick off... ;) ;D
You got to get yourself a Tevo. It is one of the best things I ever bought for a TV. With one of theses things you don't have to miss anything you really want to watch and cut out 15 minutes of commercials every hour.
Glad you get to work with your boys. I had to work nights during my boy's time in little league.
Read this Henry: (From the Merriam-Webster Dictionary)
: generally known and talked of; especially :
widely and unfavorably knownExamples of NOTORIOUS
The coach is notorious for his violent outbursts.
<a notorious mastermind of terrorist activities>
Origin of NOTORIOUS
Medieval Latin notorius, from Late Latin notorium information, indictment, from Latin noscere to come to know — more at know
First Known Use: 1534
Related to NOTORIOUS
Synonyms: discreditable, disgraceful, dishonorable, ignominious, infamous, louche, disreputable, opprobrious, shady, shameful, shoddy, shy, unrespectableAntonyms: honorable, reputable, respectable
well sure if you want to take the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as a reliable source.... :rolleyes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 13, 2011, 10:31:18 PM
well sure if you want to take the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as a reliable source.... :rolleyes:
Nah.
Just another one of those leftist, pinko, commie, sheeple, whatever other bullshit names someone wants to come up with........
sources that is just a place to get talking points.....
Has no credibility 'cuz it doesn't come from Limbaugh, Fox, Coulter, Boehner, etc..........
Forget I even mentioned it. :smile: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Quote from: followsthewolf on June 14, 2011, 05:40:32 AM
Nah.
Just another one of those leftist, pinko, commie, sheeple, whatever other bullshit names someone wants to come up with........
sources that is just a place to get talking points.....
Has no credibility 'cuz it doesn't come from Limbaugh, Fox, Coulter, Boehner, etc..........
Forget I even mentioned it. :smile: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
LIGHTEN UP WOLFIE....I WAS BEING SARCASTIC...........................are we going to get too serious on here again.......cuz I am not going down that road again...
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 14, 2011, 07:48:30 AM
LIGHTEN UP WOLFIE....I WAS BEING SARCASTIC...........................are we going to get too serious on here again.......cuz I am not going down that road again...
Good old Henery. :stirthepot: When he get caught he screams. :uncle:
".I WAS BEING SARCASTIC.."
So was I, Hank.
Didn't ya see the smiley face in front of all the rolleyes?
Read, Hank.
Look and See
I got your sarcasm, because I took it in good faith that, no matter what the subject matter, EVERYONE can agree that Merriam-Webster is a neutral source.
I wasn't getting all serious on your ass.
Politics isn't worth it.
Quote from: followsthewolf on June 14, 2011, 09:56:43 AM
".I WAS BEING SARCASTIC.."
So was I, Hank.
Didn't ya see the smiley face in front of all the rolleyes?
Read, Hank.
Look and See
I got your sarcasm, because I took it in good faith that, no matter what the subject matter, EVERYONE can agree that Merriam-Webster is a neutral source.
I wasn't getting all serious on your ass.
Politics isn't worth it.
I feelya my brother..... 8) ;) :biggrin:
bump....
Again I ask,
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 09, 2011, 01:44:21 PM
Just askin....
APRIL 23, 2010:
Biden predicts economy will create up to 500,000 jobs a month soon
Where exacty ARE these Jobs that old joe promised?.............Oh, I know, it is the repubs fault, right?
On July 14, 2009, President Obama declared the following....
"Now, my administration has a job to do as well, and that job is to get this economy back on its feet, that’s my job, and it’s a job I gladly accept. I love these folks who helped get us in this mess and then suddenly say, well, this is Obama’s economy. That’s fine. Give it to me.”
It has been given to him...........at the time we had a 9.5% unemployment rate........we are just about the same as we were then.....
and...
Home prices hit a new low in the first quarter of the year...home sales are down again....consumer confidence is down...and gas and food prices are up.
Just sayin.... :spooked:
and the media was going crazy about how bad our economy was back in 2006 when unemployment was at 5% and gas was $3 per gallon....
again, I'm just sayin....
really, is this just going to be another one I post that gets sidetracked or can somebody come up with a good excuse to why Biden can make such a prediction and yet have a green light on not even coming close to it....then simply give the POTUS a pat on the back for giving it a "try"?
just askin....
this is NOT a republican issue now.......enough time has passed to where his promises and policies should have had taken effect and come close to their predictions.....such as the unemployment will NOT go above 8% IF we pass the 878 BILLION dollar stimulus bill..........can was all agree that that Bill was probably a major disaster? to nobody's fault but their own?
I know I this is some how all STILL Bush's fault....
Yep.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 14, 2011, 04:13:51 PM
bump....
Again I ask,
really, is this just going to be another one I post that gets sidetracked or can somebody come up with a good excuse to why Biden can make such a prediction and yet have a green light on not even coming close to it....then simply give the POTUS a pat on the back for giving it a "try"?
just askin....
this is NOT a republican issue now.......enough time has passed to where his promises and policies should have had taken effect and come close to their predictions.....such as the unemployment will NOT go above 8% IF we pass the 878 BILLION dollar stimulus bill..........can was all agree that that Bill was probably a major disaster? to nobody's fault but their own?
I know I this is some how all STILL Bush's fault....
You got something right for a change it is George W. fault. If the economy was a car that George left us. We would have just totaled in out. Wrecked beyond repair.
But the economy is not a car, you have to repair it piece by piece step by step. But George W. and the Republican Party cause all of this damage and with all of the jobs they and their corporate buddies who outsourced all of the manufacturing jobs, plus all of the deregulation of the banks and stock market which let all of the dogs out and crooks and thieves out.
Causing the worse depression since the Herbert Hoover Depression. :trustme:
Exterminator, got a couple of questions. Do you still think you want all of those voting regulations of who gets to vote.
Also, come on man, what have you done to Nighthawk. :chair: Squawk :devil4: Ex. He isn't talking anymore. Before they took off the running tally of the people who had been on the Zone you could see where he checked in, but he didn't say a word. :biggrin: :rotfl: :rotfl:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 09, 2011, 03:23:13 PM
Well first of all you are always good at sidetracking the original intent of a particular post....
The facts are this.....federal revenue grew AFTER the Bush tax cuts. Perhaps it is our SPENDING that is the culprit.
Also, remember job growth may not have grew, but it did hover around 5%....and that is with the largest attack on American Soil (9/11), the most devasting hurricane to hit America in years (Katrina) and two wars.
Your Facts are from Fox; they are really good liars, using even truthful statements to promote a lie. What you said was a fact, covering a lie.
It has now been 784 days since the Democrat-controlled Senate passed any kind of a budget.....just sayin.
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 27, 2011, 01:33:08 PM
It has now been 784 days since the Democrat-controlled Senate passed any kind of a budget.....just sayin.
Why haven't you Republican gave us a "FAIR" budget.
Quote from: The Troll on June 27, 2011, 01:39:36 PM
Why haven't you Republican gave us a "FAIR" budget.
Paul Ryan
did so a few weeks ago............at least it was something to start with.
so why has it been two years for the dems to produce ANY budget, fair or not fair?..............you always gotta blame the repubs on Everything..........but, yet you won't answer WHY the dems have NOT done their job?.....WHY?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 27, 2011, 01:44:09 PM
Paul Ryan did so a few weeks ago............at least it was something to start with.
so why has it been two years for the dems to produce ANY budget, fair or not fair?..............you always gotta blame the repubs on Everything..........but, yet you won't answer WHY the dems have NOT done their job?.....WHY?
See what I mean, the first thing out of you mouth is the Paul Ryan budget. You have to be kidding me again. Won't the jokes stop :stop: coming from you.
I take it you haven't see the Republican Party running from the Painted Pig of a budget. That budget was the biggest piece of shit I have ever seen written. You can paint Paul Ryan's budget any way you want, it still is a ugly pig. You kiss :kiss: it.
Tax breaks for the corporations and the super rich and a devastating piece a of garbage for the old and infirmed people. Changing Social Security and Medicare to a voucher program and a bounty for the Private health insurance companies.
Henery, I know why you don't want to talk to me is because what I tell you is the truth. And Republicans don't like the truth. They like to live in Never, Never Land. :rolleyes: :razz:
Quote from: The Troll on June 27, 2011, 04:08:26 PM
See what I mean, the first thing out of you mouth is the Paul Ryan budget. You have to be kidding me again. Won't the jokes stop :stop: coming from you.
I take it you haven't see the Republican Party running from the Painted Pig of a budget. That budget was the biggest piece of shit I have ever seen written. You can paint Paul Ryan's budget any way you want, it still is a ugly pig. You kiss :kiss: it.
Tax breaks for the corporations and the super rich and a devastating piece a of garbage for the old and infirmed people. Changing Social Security and Medicare to a voucher program and a bounty for the Private health insurance companies.
Henery, I know why you don't want to talk to me is because what I tell you is the truth. And Republicans don't like the truth. They like to live in Never, Never Land. :rolleyes: :razz:
and AGAIN, you dodged my question.............WHY, has it been two years since the demorcast has presented a budget?..............don't dodge it....just answer it!!!..... :razz:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on June 27, 2011, 04:20:16 PM
and AGAIN, you dodged my question.............WHY, has it been two years since the demorcast has presented a budget?..............don't dodge it....just answer it!!!..... :razz:
Not I am not dodging your question. Because I don't know. But I do think no matter what the Democrats would come up with, your Republicans would turn it down. Unless it had huge tax cuts for the corporations and the super rich. Cutting Social Security, Making Medicare a voucher program and killing Medicaid for the poor, homeless and the sick poor.
So unless the Republicans relent on some of their killer programs and I do mean killer programs with Republican death panels for the poor.
Your guys don't want to be reasonable, I guess you shut down the government and you most likely are for that. :rolleyes:
News Flash!
I just seen it on TV, old turtle head Mitch McConnell said, I seen and heard with my eyes and ears. He said that there will be NO TAX RAISES ON THE RICH and the CORPORATIONS. Absolutely on tax raises only tax cuts.
I tell you the Republicans are out to kill the country and Obama. They told us, our main goal is to make Obama a one term president and they mean it. They will take us to a depression to do it. :trustme:
Quote from: The Troll on June 27, 2011, 06:33:15 PM
News Flash!
I just seen it on TV, old turtle head Mitch McConnell said, I seen and heard with my eyes and ears. He said that there will be NO TAX RAISES ON THE RICH and the CORPORATIONS. Absolutely on tax raises only tax cuts.
I tell you the Republicans are out to kill the country and Obama. They told us, our main goal is to make Obama a one term president and they mean it. They will take us to a depression to do it. :trustme:
Since the republican acceleration of the rape of the middle class worked so well, they won't mind taking us to a depression to defeat obama; the wealthiest few now have ALL the money and immune to any kind of depression, for the rest of us.
White House Staffers Got a Raise Last Year, And You Did Not...
http://gawker.com/5818310 (http://gawker.com/5818310)
The White House released its annual salary report last week, and as usual, it's nice to work for Barack Obama: Most staffers who were there for more than a year got a salary bump. A bigger one than you did.
The last time we checked in on White House salaries, we found that an astonishing 75% of continuing staffers got raises from 2009 to 2010 (http://gawker.com/5687778/white-house-staffers-got-a-bigger-raise-than-you-did-last-year)—a huge number given the fact that, according to compensation experts, most companies had skipped routine raises that year in reaction to the economic crisis that the White House was busy failing to solve. This time around—from 2010 (http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/disclosures/annual-records/2010) to 2011 (http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/disclosures/annual-records/2011)—the ratio is a little less dramatic. Of the 270 White House staffers who have been there for more than a year, 146—or 54%—received raises. The average salary increase was 8%. If you look at only staffers who got raises, the average increase was twice that.
Just sayin..... :rolleyes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 06, 2011, 04:33:11 PM
White House Staffers Got a Raise Last Year, And You Did Not...
http://gawker.com/5818310 (http://gawker.com/5818310)
The White House released its annual salary report last week, and as usual, it's nice to work for Barack Obama: Most staffers who were there for more than a year got a salary bump. A bigger one than you did.
The last time we checked in on White House salaries, we found that an astonishing 75% of continuing staffers got raises from 2009 to 2010 (http://gawker.com/5687778/white-house-staffers-got-a-bigger-raise-than-you-did-last-year)—a huge number given the fact that, according to compensation experts, most companies had skipped routine raises that year in reaction to the economic crisis that the White House was busy failing to solve. This time around—from 2010 (http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/disclosures/annual-records/2010) to 2011 (http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/disclosures/annual-records/2011)—the ratio is a little less dramatic. Of the 270 White House staffers who have been there for more than a year, 146—or 54%—received raises. The average salary increase was 8%. If you look at only staffers who got raises, the average increase was twice that.
Just sayin..... :rolleyes:
What ever the White House staff got in a raise is nothing compared to what the Bankers, the boys and girls got at the stock market and the Hedge fund got.
Oh, I almost forgot the raises the CEO, CFO and all of the upper management got in the largest corporations. Plus the lowest tax rate for the upper 2% of the richest people in the United States.
How much of a raise did you get Henry. The last time I asked you it was 4 years ago. I am sure glad some Democrats are getting a raise. They need a raise for having to work trying to get something though the damn Republicans. :biggrin:
Quote from: The Troll on July 06, 2011, 05:08:50 PM
What ever the White House staff got in a raise is nothing compared to what the Bankers, the boys and girls got at the stock market and the Hedge fund got.
Oh, I almost forgot the raises the CEO, CFO and all of the upper management got in the largest corporations. Plus the lowest tax rate for the upper 2% of the richest people in the United States.
How much of a raise did you get Henry. The last time I asked you it was 4 years ago. I am sure glad some Democrats are getting a raise. They need a raise for having to work trying to get something though the damn Republicans. :biggrin:
wow, you are like fred astaire!!! ;D you danced all over the place on that one!!! :yes:
you blamed the bankers?...who mentioned them? tax rates? CEO's?......... ;D you are killing me..... :yes: ;D
The white house is a disgrace!! :no: with NO CLASS AT ALL... :no: yet, YOU blame Bush and republicans...everybody but the POTUS.... ;D
wake up ol buddy!!!! ;)
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 06, 2011, 05:13:21 PM
wow, you are like fred astaire!!! ;D you danced all over the place on that one!!! :yes:
you blamed the bankers?...who mentioned them? tax rates? CEO's?......... ;D you are killing me..... :yes: ;D
The white house is a disgrace!! :no: with NO CLASS AT ALL... :no: yet, YOU blame Bush and republicans...everybody but the POTUS.... ;D
wake up ol buddy!!!! ;)
Oh, I'm awake, I sure not brain dead :knife: like you. Where do you get that the White House is a disgrace, with no class and Obama with no class.
You have the guts and nerve to say this after you voted for George W. Bush and Dick Cheney twice. One of the most shameful, ignorant, stupid, fool, liar, and killer of our soldiers. Who with the help of the lobbyist and the super rich and the Republican sheeple sent this country into the biggest depression in the modern history of this country.
Millions of jobs lost because the greed of the Republican Party and you want me to wake up. I say this boy is a lame brain, if you say up he says down, if you say good he says bad. One hell of a Loony Tune :chick: HAWK. :no: :rolleyes: :razz:
With the American taxpayers paying 10 Bullion 200 Million dollars a month for air conditioning to keep our troop cool in the two wars George W. Bush started. (we do have to do what is right for our troops) Isn't amazing that the Republicans in Washington DC can't find anything to cut but Social Security, Medicare and Medicade.
Plus pushing America into being a deadbeat nation and putting us into default. :knife: Damn I hate these SOB.
Just saying. :biggrin: :bliss: :bliss: :bliss: :flag: :salute: :4th2:
Correction. To cool our troops and our officers and their staff. Plus probably the thousand of vultures, Dick Cheney's private contractors is 10 Billion 200 Million Dollars a year. A year. Just saying. :biggrin: :yeah: :yeah:
Republicans Party :chair: American Middle Class
Starve The Beast Worked, But It Defunded The GovernmentQuoteFor the last 30 years the conservative, regressive wing of the Republican party has been dead set on creating an environment that obliterates the government. Of course their rhetoric is "it's a spending problem", that's been their mantra for almost a generation. The debt and deficit was created by this foolish economic model called the Laffer curve. Essentially the Laffer curve tried to illustrate that when you lower taxes to a certain point , government revenue actually goes up. This is obviously a complete economic fallacy.
America is currently at the pinnacle of this regressive plan to eradicate the country of social programs. We just don't have the revenue to continue with them, but it's not a SPENDING problem, it's a revenue problem.
Look at this chart put together by Talking Points Memo, it shows that from 2001-2011 domestic discretionary spending has remained FLAT at 369 billion dollars when adjusted for inflation and population growth. We aren't spending anymore money on the programs, like women's shelters education or other programs that regular Americans need. We just cut taxes to the point where we can no longer fund these programs.
In another tragic story reported by Forbes, Alto,Texas just eliminated every single police officer. "We had to do something drastic," says Jerry Flowers, a city councilman in Alto, Texas. "The police department," Mr. Flowers goes on, "being a non-money-making entity, was the easiest to get rid of while we catch our breath and build up some cash."
In the meantime, for protection against ne'er-do-wells, petty thieves and outright criminals, citizens of Alto will have to rely on the Cherokee County sheriff's office, headquartered 12 miles away.
"I'm going to try," commented the county sheriff when notified, "but I can't guarantee you there will always be an officer in the town."
Until recently, drastic cutbacks like this were the province of down-and-out medium-sized cities like Camden, N.J. – where half the police force has been let go. Or Oakland, Calif. – where the cops no longer answer burglary calls.
This is the Republican America, where corporations, billionaires and millionaires get tax breaks and pay for loopholes and the rest of us, sit back and watch as the very foundation of our country is drastically changed or eliminated.
We are the wealthiest country on earth and in history, yet we are going to have streets not protected by police, we cut back on programs that help the poor and elderly all the while taxes continue to drop for the wealthy.
Starve the beast has had some unintended consequences it seems and the people who are going to suffer are the people who make America great, the American middle, and working class.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/07/07/starve-the-beast-worked-but-it-defunded-the-government/
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 06, 2011, 04:33:11 PM
White House Staffers Got a Raise Last Year, And You Did Not...
Actually, I did.
Quote from: Exterminator on July 07, 2011, 02:49:21 PM
Actually, I did.
I glad you did, I did not. But what gets me is Henery is complaining that people who was making $40,000 a year living in the Washington DC area, one hell of a high cost of living area was getting a raise. Why would you think that? Well, the first one would be his cheap ass company didn't give him one.
Maybe he can write a letter to George W. and make a complaint on how he left the country. :rotfl: :rotfl:
Quote from: The Troll on July 07, 2011, 03:40:37 PM
I glad you did, I did not. But what gets me is Henery is complaining that people who was making $40,000 a year living in the Washington DC area, one hell of a high cost of living area was getting a raise.
nobody put a gun to their head and told them to work there.............the POTUS sucks!!! and his adminstration SUCKS!
They do NOT care about the USA....they only care about greed and power.....but, yet Corp America are the bad guys...the very people that are employing the Country....
democrats... :rolleyes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 07, 2011, 09:25:46 PM
nobody put a gun to their head and told them to work there.............the POTUS sucks!!! and his adminstration SUCKS!
They do NOT care about the USA....they only care about greed and power.....but, yet Corp America are the bad guys...the very people that are employing the Country....
democrats... :rolleyes:
Just look at you defending the corporations, defending the Republican Party/Teabaggers. Plus not thinking that George W. and prick Cheney wasn't about greed and power. What a dumbass.
I suppose you think since the people in the Army, Navy, Air Force and the Coast Guard don't have a bitch, is because they volunteered. Is that what you are saying. They asked for it and a whole lot would like to get out now and get out of war. What a fart bag. :jester:
Henry do you honestly believe that these $40,000 a year staffers who took the raises don't love America. But desides all of your lies, I heard on TV today, there was no pay raised given. So why don't you take a pay cut to prove that you love America. Henery you are truly an asshole and I do mean an asshole ( * ). :azz:
Quote from: The Troll on July 07, 2011, 10:59:16 PM
I suppose you think since the people in the Army, Navy, Air Force and the Coast Guard don't have a bitch, is because they volunteered. Is that what you are saying. They asked for it and a whole lot would like to get out now and get out of war. What a fart bag. :jester:
Henry do you honestly believe that these $40,000 a year staffers who took the raises don't love America. But desides all of your lies, I heard on TV today, there was no pay raised given. So why don't you take a pay cut to prove that you love America. Henery you are truly an asshole and I do mean an asshole ( * ). :azz:
First of all, I don't hear our Military complaining due to lack of pay...(although, I personally believe THEY should be getting a raise, NOT some dickheaded WhiteHouse staffers)...but, every person who becomes a soldier know exactly what their pay is when they sign on the dotted line...
Secondly, I do not get paid from tax payers money.....If I take a pay cut will not improve our country......are YOU really that ignorant? seriously?
and third, maybe I am an asshole Troll, at least in YOUR eyes I am. But, I can tell you one thing I know when we are being snookered by a bunch of politicians.....like we are right now.
Listen to me on this Troll.....I can honestly care less, if a millionaire has to pay a few more percentage points on taxes...maybe they should. But I believe in standing on principals. Raising taxes will NOT fix anything. Our dickheads in Washington will just find MORE ways to spend those tax revenues....THEY will NOT balance any budget. They PRINCIPAL that MOST conservatives want to adhere to is this......LISTEN CLOSELY...
QUIT SPENDING MONEY WE DO NOT HAVE!!!!! Get rid of fraudulant spending!!!! Quit spending on programs that we should not have in the first place!!!!! The vast majority of conservatives do NOT want to do away with SS, Medicaid or Medicare. We just want to utilize the money we currently bring in. We need to be smarter with our money. The basic principal of keeping taxes low, and keeping Government at a reduced level as possible is a GOOD THING for this Nation.......NOT HIGH TAXES AND A LARGE GOVERNMENT!!! why oh why is this SO hard for a democrat to understand!!!!
WHY? seriously......Palehorse? Sandy? all of you guys, WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT CONCEPT? I am asking you to give me your honest answer...I am NOT an asshole, just because Troll cannot understand basic principals.
and last Troll, I really do not appreciate the way you slam my place of employement OR my boss. YOU don't know shit, and you prove it when you speak like you do. and YOU can kiss my ass too, while you are at it. :azz:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 08, 2011, 08:21:22 AM
First of all, I don't hear our Military complaining due to lack of pay...
Then you aren't talking to them. . . I have three
in my family, and a host of presently serving friends, and every last one of them are bitching about it. Moreover, several of these endured a months long period of unemployment simply due to the fact the "party of no" held up funding for their sectors of service!
Quote from: Palehorse on July 08, 2011, 12:05:19 PM
Then you aren't talking to them. . . I have three in my family, and a host of presently serving friends, and every last one of them are bitching about it. Moreover, several of these endured a months long period of unemployment simply due to the fact the "party of no" held up funding for their sectors of service!
is that just an opinion? or is it fact?
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 08, 2011, 12:08:32 PM
is that just an opinion? or is it fact?
Here's a quote from the time period that supports their view. (CBS)
As Congress continues to wrangle over its budget bill and attempts to avert a government shutdown, full and timely military pay hangs in the balance -- and Republicans are faulting Democrats for allowing that risk.
Much like the debate over Planned Parenthood funding, military pay has given Washington politicians a simple issue that resonates with voters that they can use to cast their opponents as irresponsible and unwilling to negotiate. While it has mostly been Republicans who have seized the issue of military pay in the budget debate, some Democrats have in turn accused the GOP of turning their backs on the troops. . . .
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20052185-503544.html (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20052185-503544.html)
http://www.stripes.com/military-life/military-update-gi-bill-pay-delay-threat-from-new-reform-bill-eases-1.148578 (http://www.stripes.com/military-life/military-update-gi-bill-pay-delay-threat-from-new-reform-bill-eases-1.148578)
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/01/army-pay-disparity-between-nco-officer-debate-012211w/ (http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/01/army-pay-disparity-between-nco-officer-debate-012211w/)
http://paycheck-chronicles.military.com/2011/06/27/pay-and-allowances-fair-or-not/ (http://paycheck-chronicles.military.com/2011/06/27/pay-and-allowances-fair-or-not/)
And here's a report that demonstrates this is not a new problem!
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04911.pdf (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04911.pdf)
The above demonstrate that my personal knowledge, and the feedback I have consistently received from friends and family members that are currently US Military active, are FACT and not just opinion.
PH, first of all you are taking what I said and turning into another argument....My origninal comment was that Military are not complaining about thier pay....which, most are NOT...
Now you bring up a whole new topic about Military Funding and Bills that the dickheads in Washington are using to pass other bills....
My whole point was, those who sign up in the first place are NOT doing because tha pay is great....they know exactly what they are going to be paid.
that seems to be the way 'debates' go on here....
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 08, 2011, 12:33:42 PM
PH, first of all you are taking what I said and turning into another argument....My origninal comment was that Military are not complaining about thier pay....which, most are NOT...
Now you bring up a whole new topic about Military Funding and Bills that the dickheads in Washington are using to pass other bills....
My whole point was, those who sign up in the first place are NOT doing because tha pay is great....they know exactly what they are going to be paid.
that seems to be the way 'debates' go on here....
Prove they are not. . . I say they are and have proven it.
Quote from: Palehorse on July 08, 2011, 12:35:06 PM
Prove they are not. . . I say they are and have proven it.
every person KNOWS what the pay is when they hold their hand up and take the oath.....
you need more proof?
that is a fact.....
Are you sayin those guys are lied too, then after they go through boot camp, they are then told the truth?
seriously...wth are you arguing about.....what I said is 100% true.
. . .Officers make more in base pay, enlisted folks get clothing allowances that officers do not, and enlisted get more BAS than officers. (I STILL haven't figured that out!) However, with over 70 different pays and allowances, total military compensation is about much more than rank. Variations for occupation, time in service, duty station, and deployment status mean that a lower-ranking service member can make much more than a higher ranking service member. Assignment incentive pay can, in extreme circumstances, be even more than base pay. There are even special allowances, such as BAH-Diff and Family Subsistence Supplemental Allowance, specifically for unusual family situations. And bonuses – we could write pages on the relative merits of various bonus programs. . .
As for my bringing congress into all of this, they are responsible for the budget cuts that have eliminated funding for domestic units here at home, and created months long periods of unemployment for active US Military members here at home!
And while it is true that our current military is 100% volunteer, just how long do you expect that it will remain so if this crap continues? How long before our children are subjected to a draft because of the inability of our government to fairly and consistently pay these men and women?
Your blanket statement surrounding military members NOT complaining about their pay is nothing more than 100% pure speculation based upon propaganda. It is not based in fact.
it is a fact that military get paid a certain amount a month for their services...........
it is a fact that they sign based upon thier own free will.....
it is a fact that if they don't like what the pay is, after they sign, it is no one elses fault.
those are three facts....that based my conclusion........NO PROPAGANDA INVOLVED.
WHY ARE YOU JUST WANTING TO ARGUE?
you have completely side tracked my whold point because of this...
I am not saying that our govenment is not screwing them in other ways....the are
YOU were the one who said you don't hear anyone in the military complaining about their pay.
Now that I've shown that claim to be false, you are saying, basically, "screw them". :eek:
I'm done. And you know damned well why I am quick to stand and be heard when I read/hear/see anyone misrepresenting our military!
Quote from: Palehorse on July 08, 2011, 01:05:39 PM
YOU were the one who said you don't hear anyone in the military complaining about their pay.
Now that I've shown that claim to be false, you are saying, basically, "screw them". :eek:
I'm done. And you know damned well why I am quick to stand and be heard when I read/hear/see anyone misrepresenting our military!
wow!!!
we are on TWO completely different wave lengths......
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 08, 2011, 01:17:29 PM
wow!!!
we are on TWO completely different wave lengths......
You sure are. Always writting checks your ass can't cash. Ding Dong, Ding Dong, Ding dong. Who's there? Duh, :doh:
Troll said:
QuoteI suppose you think since the people in the Army, Navy, Air Force and the Coast Guard don't have a bitch, is because they volunteered. Is that what you are saying. They asked for it and a whole lot would like to get out now and get out of war. What a fart bag. (http://theunknownzone.us/smf/Smileys3/default/jester.gif)
Henry do you honestly believe that these $40,000 a year staffers who took the raises don't love America. But desides all of your lies, I heard on TV today, there was no pay raised given. So why don't you take a pay cut to prove that you love America. Henery you are truly an asshole and I do mean an asshole ( * ).
First of all, I don't hear our Military complaining due to lack of pay...(although, I personally believe THEY should be getting a raise, NOT some dickheaded WhiteHouse staffers)...but, every person who becomes a soldier know exactly what their pay is when they sign on the dotted line...
Secondly, I do not get paid from tax payers money.....If I take a pay cut will not improve our country......are YOU really that ignorant? seriously?
and third, maybe I am an asshole Troll, at least in YOUR eyes I am. But, I can tell you one thing I know when we are being snookered by a bunch of politicians.....like we are right now.
Listen to me on this Troll.....I can honestly care less, if a millionaire has to pay a few more percentage points on taxes...maybe they should. But I believe in standing on principals. Raising taxes will NOT fix anything. Our dickheads in Washington will just find MORE ways to spend those tax revenues....THEY will NOT balance any budget. They PRINCIPAL that MOST conservatives want to adhere to is this......LISTEN CLOSELY...
QUIT SPENDING MONEY WE DO NOT HAVE!!!!! Get rid of fraudulant spending!!!! Quit spending on programs that we should not have in the first place!!!!! The vast majority of conservatives do NOT want to do away with SS, Medicaid or Medicare. We just want to utilize the money we currently bring in. We need to be smarter with our money. The basic principal of keeping taxes low, and keeping Government at a reduced level as possible is a GOOD THING for this Nation.......NOT HIGH TAXES AND A LARGE GOVERNMENT!!! why oh why is this SO hard for a democrat to understand!!!!
WHY? seriously......Palehorse? Sandy? all of you guys, WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT CONCEPT? I am asking you to give me your honest answer...I am NOT an asshole, just because Troll cannot understand basic principals.
and last Troll, I really do not appreciate the way you slam my place of employement OR my boss. YOU don't know shit, and you prove it when you speak like you do. and YOU can kiss my ass too, while you are at it. (http://theunknownzone.us/smf/Smileys3/default/ass.jpg)
Herery, I don't even know where you work or put in you time sitting on your ass. You don't have the "balls" to tell us. I'll tell you where I worked, my badge number. I also tell you my plumbing contractor number.
Hell, I was proud of where I worked. Now I wasn't to proud of some of the asshole I worked for because every business has got his assholes. I don't know where you rate with your secret company. :biggrin:
Quote from: The Troll on July 08, 2011, 05:07:31 PM
Herery, I don't even know where you work or put in you time sitting on your ass. You don't have the "balls" to tell us. I'll tell you where I worked, my badge number. I also tell you my plumbing contractor number.
Hell, I was proud of where I worked. Now I wasn't to proud of some of the asshole I worked for because every business has got his assholes. I don't know where you rate with your secret company. :biggrin:
I haven't kept it a secret, but this is also a publinc domain....and certain info does NOT need to be revealed....I would tell you in person though....and one of these days, when you are buying me that tenderloin and beer, I will tell you... :razz:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on July 08, 2011, 04:38:16 PM
Troll said:
First of all, I don't hear our Military complaining due to lack of pay...(although, I personally believe THEY should be getting a raise, NOT some dickheaded WhiteHouse staffers)...but, every person who becomes a soldier know exactly what their pay is when they sign on the dotted line...
Secondly, I do not get paid from tax payers money.....If I take a pay cut will not improve our country......are YOU really that ignorant? seriously?
and third, maybe I am an asshole Troll, at least in YOUR eyes I am. But, I can tell you one thing I know when we are being snookered by a bunch of politicians.....like we are right now.
Listen to me on this Troll.....I can honestly care less, if a millionaire has to pay a few more percentage points on taxes...maybe they should. But I believe in standing on principals. Raising taxes will NOT fix anything. Our dickheads in Washington will just find MORE ways to spend those tax revenues....THEY will NOT balance any budget. They PRINCIPAL that MOST conservatives want to adhere to is this......LISTEN CLOSELY...
QUIT SPENDING MONEY WE DO NOT HAVE!!!!! Get rid of fraudulant spending!!!! Quit spending on programs that we should not have in the first place!!!!! The vast majority of conservatives do NOT want to do away with SS, Medicaid or Medicare. We just want to utilize the money we currently bring in. We need to be smarter with our money. The basic principal of keeping taxes low, and keeping Government at a reduced level as possible is a GOOD THING for this Nation.......NOT HIGH TAXES AND A LARGE GOVERNMENT!!! why oh why is this SO hard for a democrat to understand!!!!
WHY? seriously......Palehorse? Sandy? all of you guys, WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT CONCEPT? I am asking you to give me your honest answer...I am NOT an asshole, just because Troll cannot understand basic principals.
and last Troll, I really do not appreciate the way you slam my place of employement OR my boss. YOU don't know shit, and you prove it when you speak like you do. and YOU can kiss my ass too, while you are at it. (http://theunknownzone.us/smf/Smileys3/default/ass.jpg)
You doing OK there kid, until you brought the fox news talking points to bear on: "keeping taxes low" which really means keeping the bush tax giveaway to the richest few (ever) in place to help your poor, helpless, billionaire friends keep from paying what they really owe. Fuck you.
:icon_twisted: