Are You- Democrat or Republican

POSTED BY: doublethink84
UPDATED: Tuesday, November 5, 2024 23:04
VIEWED: 14639
PAGE 4 of 6

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE

RUE

Saturday, July 17, 2004 10:39 PM

Quote:
How in the hell is forcing citizens to give away most of their income to the government and denying people their second amendment rights related to freedom?

http://www.taxfoundation.org/ff/factsonCA.html
California’s Corporate Income Tax Rate is ... 8.84%
http://cobrands.business.findlaw.com/business_organizations/choosing/n
olo/ency/BACFCE69-7858-4F6D-ACB8839F3BAC4187.html
Because federal corporate income tax rates on the first $75,000 of corporate income are lower than the federal individual income tax rates on that same amount ...
and Federal corporate rates aren't progressive
http://www.smbiz.com/sbrl001.html#ci
Corporate Income Tax Rates
100,000 - 335,000 39%
335,000 - 10,000,000 34%
10,000,000 - 15,000,000 35%
15,000,000 - 18,333,333 38%
18,333,333 - .......... 35%

In addition, businesses get write-offs and tax shelters so that many pay no income tax at all (al la Enron.) This doesn't count the big tax-giveaway Bush gave to corporations.

Your opinion about government and taxes was bought very cheaply.

DARKJESTER

Saturday, July 17, 2004 11:30 PM

Democrat, but I have never voted for a straight ticket in an election. I know several Republicans in local and state-level politics who earn my vote every time because they are good people, and because the Democrats who run against them leave something to be desired.

MAL "You only gotta scare him."
JAYNE "Pain is scary..."

AURAPTOR

Sunday, July 18, 2004 1:55 PM

Shiny wrote:
Saturday, July 17, 2004 08:00

Quote:
sure glad there's a "small goverment, individual/states rights protecting" republican administration in the white house!

Never said the GOP was perfect, which kinda points to why I vote Libertarian more often than not. But despite the things you listed, the GOP is a far better choice than the Big Gov't , socialist over in the Dem party. Both have their drawbacks, but one the big scale of intrusion and trying to control one's life, the Democrats far out weigh what the GOP has done.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

SIGNYM

Sunday, July 18, 2004 4:24 PM

Registerd Democrat, but occasionally votes Green (not in this election, tho!)

What would all you libertarians/ republicans say if Bush decide to... er.. "delay" the elections?

GRRARGG

Sunday, July 18, 2004 4:45 PM

I vote straight ticket mutant cow. At least you know what you're really voting for.

Blue Sun used to be Capri Sun back on Earth That Was. Honest. Heard it from a Blue Handed feller.

RECHELON

Sunday, July 18, 2004 5:49 PM

Anarchist.

Which just means I believe that all power corrupts.

Registered with no party.

Will, on occasion, vote Socialist, Libertarian, and Green. In presidential elections, will vote Democrat. (Yea! Gridlock!) Haven't yet found a Republican I'd feel safe voting for.

http://www.williamgillis.blogspot.com/

CANTTAKESKY

Sunday, July 18, 2004 7:07 PM

Libertarian. The government is a body of men (and women) who are usually notably ungoverned.

I find the idea of a Brown Party entertaining. What kind of platform would Browncoats support?

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

DRBORIS

Sunday, July 18, 2004 10:21 PM

Based on the split we've just seen, I don't really see browncoats as a unified political force...

Personally, I think its interesting how many people with Libertarian tendancies enjoy this show. The Firefly verse and our BDH's kinda lead a very Libertarian, close to Anarchaic even, lifestyle, despite the large governmental force of the Aliance.

Random thoughts aside, mainly I'm motivated by the fiscal, and letting me keep my money in the first place seems like a better plan than redistributing it to me later, so I typically vote for Republican, with Libertarian leanings whenever they're helpful in making decisions.

And that was my 2 cents.

AURAPTOR

Monday, July 19, 2004 12:40 AM

I think it unlikely that Bush, or anyone, would delay the elections, even if there were multiple attacks like in Spain. But you can see the cluster that could occur if some areas didn't get to vote , and the rest of the country did. How unfair would that be ? Pretty damn unfair. If there is a situation that calls for any delay, don't you think it best to have some sort of framework in place before ? Can't you see the flip side of this issue.... NO plans are made, something happens, and various groups bitch and moan about how incompitent the President is, in this age of terror, to NOT have some sort of back up plan.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Sucks both ways. Welcome to the age of the 21st century lawyer.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

SHINY

Monday, July 19, 2004 1:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
I think it unlikely that Bush, or anyone, would delay the elections, even if there were multiple attacks like in Spain. But you can see the cluster that could occur if some areas didn't get to vote , and the rest of the country did. How unfair would that be ? Pretty damn unfair. If there is a situation that calls for any dealy, don't you think it best to have some sort of framework in place before ? Can't you see the flip side of this issue.... NO plans are made, something happens, and various groups bitch and moan about how incompitent the President is, in this age of terror, to NOT have some sort of back up plan.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Sucks both ways. Welcome to the age of the 21st century lawyer.

Yes, there should be a backup plan. No, it should not be created in 100% secrecy, with little to no input into the process from the public and/or their elected representatives on both sides of the aisle. Not everything is a national security issue, and hiding too much can often make things worse instead of better because if they roll out a "surprise" new process in the wake of an attack, how are people supposed to feel calm and confident in the rule of law? Certain military and logistical response DETAILS may need to be kept vague, but the general plan should be publicized and DEBATED IN PUBLIC, so there is confidence in the process. This means consensus building, and I would be very pleasantly surprised if those currently running the administration, homeland security department, justice department, CIA, FBI, and other important government agencies will be able to pull it off in an effective, sufficiently transparent, and confidence-building way.

"I left my heart in Seren-ity Val-ley..." <-- the farthest I've ever gotten in writing filk. ;)

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE