Hillary Clinton: just because she deserves her own thread

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Saturday, September 27, 2025 01:07
VIEWED: 114591
PAGE 38 of 46

Quote:

---

When I what? Are you responding to the voices in your head again? -SIGNY

I'm just responding in-kind to your posts. If you don't want to be name-called, try not starting it. Even kids in k-garten have figured that out, but apparently you missed an important developmental milestone somewhere along the way. -SIGNY

NO SIG you are not responding to what I post.

---

Well, mostly what YOU post is that I'm a "commie troll". What kind of response are you looking for? "No I'm not?" Ridiculous personal attacks don't deserve a response.

Quote:

---

You are always the one driving the message.

---

YES! THANK YOU FOR NOTICING! It's called "staying on topic". You might want to try it some time.

Quote:

---

A message with an agenda that is anti-American.

---

I fervently love America. Which is why I expect her leaders to do so much better than selling everyone off to the highest bidder, and use everyone as unwitting cannon fodder for personal gain. Didn't you go thru that with Vietnam? Iraq?? If you really think I'm "anti-American" then maybe YOUR best tactic is to show = exactly = where I don't have America's interests at heart. That would make for interesting discussion.

Quote:

---

As for you calling me names, I couldn’t be happier.

---

Yes, I agree, you're a pig wallowing in shit. We got that.

Quote:

---

Your calls for less insults and name calling amongst each other always includes an insult. Lol, so I’m good comrade.

---

Dood, I'm just trying to point out internet etiquette. ("politeness") I don't know if you noticed, but I don't call you a name unless YOU CALL ME ONE FIRST. Word, man! Check it out! The moment YOUR name-calling disappears, so does mine!

Quote:

---

I will second source my Zerohedge posts, I promise. I'm just kind of busy right now to provide links to all of the stories, but I did double check them on the media that you "believe". -SIGNY

So what you are saying is that sourcing a fake news outlet where the writers hide their identities is ok with you. -THUGR

---

No. Try reading with comprehension. I said I SECOND SOURCED what ZEROHEDGE had posted, which means I found it on media that YOU would believe.

Wait.

I. Think. I. said. That. Already.

Quote:

---

(That's how I know that calling for Assange's assassination happened in 2010, not 2016). But EVEN WITH SOURCES THAT YOU "BELIEVE", I DOUBT THAT YOU WILL RESPOND BY DISCUSSING THE POINTS BROUGHT UP. -SIGNY

First this is a subjective statement.=THUGR

---

No, it's an objective one, because I'm not saying anything about your origins ("military") or your presumed intentions (troll") or what I think you feel ("pro-imperium") or why ("too drunk or too propagandized to do any better"). I'm predicting your VERY OBSERVABLE BEHAVIOR, which can be viewed by everyone here. The basis of science. And amazingly (or maybe not so) you did EXACTLY as I predicted: You avoided talking about Hillary 100%.

Try understanding the difference between "subjective" (What is personal, emotional, instinctive, intuitive, FELT BY YOU) and "objective" (not influenced by emotions, observable by many, fact) and you will have gotten farther than many.

Quote:

---

Second, you are trying to turn my responses to you in a direction that better suits your agenda. Not going to happen comrade.

---

No, limpdick I'm trying to discuss the topic.

Every time you name-call, and every time you use the word "you" or "your" in a sentence, it is obvious.... by the rules of grammar ... that you are attempting to make the person you're talking to THE SUBJECT of the conversation. English. Grammar. Use it.

Quote:

---

You will either say it's "old news" or "no big deal" or something along those lines, just so you can avoid discu

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

1KIKI

Sunday, August 14, 2016 3:43 AM

"You pretty much have listed everyone on this site but Kiki and JSF as stupid. THAT should tell you something."

That a million flies eat shit? And that just because a million files are eating it, it doesn't make it non-shit? And that you're a fly, G?

That's what it tell me.

---

---

---

Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

"I merely used it to show how Kiki's detailed analysis"

I actually posted the entire dnc platform. Then I posted it - AGAIN! - where I labeled the parts that weren't going to happen because they required the republican congress to vote for them, or because they were meaningless statements like 'believe' or 'fight' instead of action plans like 'veto' or 'filibuster'.

It was only after posting the entire platform - TWICE! - the second time with extensive annotation, that I posted an abbreviated commentary.

But I guess ALL that posting went past you - TWICE! - because, frankly, you're too biased, lazy and stupid to even notice it, let alone deal with it.

Shoo, fly.

---

---

---

Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

You pretty much have listed everyone on this site but Kiki and JSF as stupid. THAT should tell you something.-G

---

Yes, it tells me that FREM, BYTE, ANTHONYT, WULFENSTAR, SUCCOTASH, GINO, DREAMTROVE, SARGEX, even GEEZER, and many others, have left the forum.

Quote:

---

Did you hear both candidates speeches on the economy?

---

No. All I know about Trump's speech is what NPR said what Hillary's campaign said about it, and a few clips here and there from both. Which doesn't prevent me from having an opinion about what I heard.

Quote:

---

Where did you get those Hillary is sick videos I keep asking about?

---

Youtube. Where else?

Quote:

---

Did this CNN video - which I discussed and you have failed to ("stay on topic!") come in that same batch or was that in the next day's anti-Hillary email instructions? Like it or not, where you and Rumplekiki get your instructions IS part of the topic of this election, try as you might to deny and deflect from that.

---

Oh, is that one of your "subtle" digs?
Do you REALLY expect an answer to that? And why are you stumping for Hillary anyway? You're not even American!

Quote:

---

Simple Stupid questions even you could answer.

---

Well. I answered your stupid, un-American questions! Happy now?

I have a comment about what little I heard of Hillary's plan and Trump's plan, which has to do with tax rates on businesses (Trump) and wealthy individuals (Hillary). But it needs a story. Because while I think (or at least assume) that everyone KNOWS that large international corporations NEVER pay the nominal 35% ... they either have lobbied successfully for tax breaks and subsidies, or have moved their corporate offices abroad, etc ... not as many people know about the tax avoidance schemes available to the very rich.

But first, a story about Mossack Fonseca, the kind of "international wealth management law firm" that is SO PROMINENTLY FEATURED IN HILLARY'S DONATION LIST. (They are those name you know nothing about, which I looked up.)
https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cid=N00000019&
cycle=Career

THE STORY
Nothing causes the eyes to glaze over like a story about international tax law. But Mossack Fonseca, which had its records spilled by an internal whistleblower, provides the kind of insight that is usually missing from the picture. What Mossack Fonesca does (or did) is help companies and wealthy individuals avoid taxes. In order to take advantage of their services, you have to be referred by a previous customer. If you are, you're discreetly shown thru the door where you get to pick from their services:

Those include pre-formed "foundations", all set to go with a mission statement, registration, board*, mailing address, email address, fax number, and all the accoutrement of a "foundation" into which the very wealthy can pour their wealth.

Off-the-shelf dummy corporations, with a registration, board*, mailing address, email address, fax number, and all the accoutrement of a "corporation" into which 0.01% individuals can pour their wealth. These, BTW, are already set up.

What blew my mind: "Aged" corporations and foundations. Because, for a much larger fee, one can access "corporations" and "foundations" which have been registered and been "in operation" for over 15 years! These entities were set up years ago and allowed to age on the shelf, until needed. Instant history!

*One Mossack Fonseca employee appeared on the "board" of over 100 shell corporations.

Now, back to Trump and Saint Hillary.

If you're talking about the top 0.01%, or international corporations, the nominal tax rate REALLY DOESN'T MATTER. Hillary can raise it to 30% for the wealthy. Trump can lower it to 15% for business. The ultra wealthy and their corporations, who have access to tax breaks and international financial law firm

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Now, back to Trump and Saint Hillary.

If you're talking about the top 0.01%, or international corporations, the nominal tax rate REALLY DOESN'T MATTER. Hillary can raise it to 30% for the wealthy. Trump can lower it to 15% for business. The ultra wealthy and their corporations, who have access to tax breaks and international financial law firms, NEVER PAY THE NOMINAL RATE ANYWAY. I'm sorry, but they don't, they just don't.

---

We don't know what Trump pays because he broke his promise to release his tax returns, but Hillary and Bill Clinton paid an effective federal tax rate of 34.2% in 2015. In 2014 they paid an effective rate of 35.7%.

Clinton’s running mate Tim Kaine and his wife also released 10 years of tax returns on Friday. In 2015, Virginia Sen. Kaine and his wife, Anne Holton, paid an effective federal rate of 20.3% on $313,441 in adjusted gross income.
www.marketwatch.com/story/hillary-and-bill-clinton-paid-effective-fede
ral-tax-rate-of-342-in-2015-2016-08-12

www.hillaryclinton.com/page/tax-returns/


The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

We don't know what Trump pays because he broke his promise to release his tax returns, but Hillary and Bill Clinton paid an effective federal tax rate of 34.2% in 2015. In 2014 they paid an effective rate of 35.7%.

---

And avoided taxes on $1 million dollars of a $10 DECLARED income income by donating to their favorite charity ... the Clinton Foundation!

I've spoken disparagingly in the past about the wealthy and their foundations. Quite often, the foundations are ways to further business or political goals in a tax sheltered way.

AFA what I said about the overall effect of raising tax rates on the wealthy (will tap those who can't escape) or lowering tax rates on business (will benefit small and medium-sized businesses based in the USA) ... talking about nominal tax rates is kind of a dodge unless you also tax about TAX LAW. The taxes that are paid are so subject to what it considered taxable, and the kinds of deductions that individuals and businesses can take, that talking about changing the nominal tax rate is meaningless without further discussion. For example, if Trump has said that he was going to lower the nominal corporate tax to 15% but eliminate loopholes, special considerations, and subsidies, that would have been more meaningful


Reagan, you may recall, lowered the nominal individual tax rates, but then eliminated so many deductions (like interest paid on ANY debt) that the middle class actually wound up paying more.

--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

The lower income classes have a W-2 form to keep them honest. Since income is self-reported in the upper income classes, there is nothing to keep them honest but their own integrity and their slight concern of a possible audit by the IRS. The bigger the liar the smaller the taxes.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

And avoided taxes on $1 million dollars of a $10 million income income by donating to their favorite charity ... the Clinton Foundation!

I've spoken disparagingly in the past about the wealthy and their foundations. Quite often, the foundations are ways to further business or political goals in a tax sheltered way.

AFA what I said about the overall effect of raising tax rates on the wealthy (will tap those who can't escape) or lowering tax rates on business (will benefit small and medium-sized businesses based in the USA) ... talking about nominal tax rates is kind of a dodge unless you also tax about TAX LAW. The taxes that are paid are so subject to what it considered taxable, and the kinds of deductions that individuals and businesses can take, that talking about changing the nominal tax rate is meaningless without further discussion. For example, if Trump has said that he was going to lower the nominal corporate tax to 15% but eliminate loopholes, special considerations, and subsidies, that would have been more meaningful


Reagan, you may recall, lowered the nominal individual tax rates, but then eliminated so many deductions (like interest paid on ANY debt) that the middle class actually wound up paying more.

---

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME