Evil lefty Liberal subversive media lies about Bush, the war, the vets, and Rush Limbaugh's drug addiction!!!!

POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 19:45
VIEWED: 8008
PAGE 1 of 2

1 2 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE

CHRISISALL

Friday, November 30, 2007 4:41 PM

Bush is a smart, savvy President.
There IS no war; it's an action, one that's going very well, actually.
All the vets are getting their due, if not more than their due- no problems there.
Rush had a 'problem', not some ghetto-like addiction, so back off you socialistas!!!

Fox News is your only alternative to the lies and exaggerations of the freedom-hating, terrorist-sympathizing, troop-un-supporting pinko press and TV!!!

The Alternate-Universe Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Friday, November 30, 2007 5:32 PM

>>>And Haken is trying to suppress this message, he keeps making it disappear so as to keep this voice of Neo-Con truth out of the discussion!!!!

CENSORSHIP! CENSORSHIP!

Still the Alternate-Universe Chrisisall

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Friday, November 30, 2007 5:37 PM

Start another thread intended to enflame partisanship, check.
Reply to same thread within minutes if no takers yet, check.
Slip into the thread after flame-war insues and call for peace and understanding, keep posted.

CHRISISALL

Friday, November 30, 2007 5:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Start another thread intended to enflame partisanship, check.
Reply to same thread within minutes if no takers yet, check.
Slip into the thread after flame-war insues and call for peace and understanding, keep posted.

Okay...interesting.

My intention is to balance the ridiculous claim that the media has a liberal bias by going as far wrong the other way, not strictly to 'inflame partisanship'.

Yes, I do see that when I start these silly rebuttals, I do seem to bump them soon to get a response- in that way I guess plead guilty to being an attention-whore of kinds (thanks for responding, BTW

).

I usually call for peace and understanding in other's threads, but I have done it in at least one of my own...

But it's interesting that you noticed a pattern, even if you're reaching just a little with it.
It made me think...I've never denied being a little bit of an instigator...

NOW, let's discuss why the Liberal media lies about the weather and Britany Spears and stuff!

Chrisisall

STORYMARK

Friday, November 30, 2007 5:57 PM

Don't forget the lies, damned LIES about Rudy's philandering, mis-appropriation of funds, and misuse of the NYPD Taxi service for his mistress.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

CHRISISALL

Friday, November 30, 2007 6:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Don't forget the lies, damned LIES about Rudy's philandering, mis-appropriation of funds, and misuse of the NYPD Taxi service for his mistress.

I plead for peace and understanding here, Story- would you do any different if you were a scrutinized, sexually frustrated public figure with pull?

The semi-Alternate-'Verse Chrisisall

JONGSSTRAW

Friday, November 30, 2007 6:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:

My intention is to balance the ridiculous claim that the media has a liberal bias

It's hardly a ridiculous claim....study after study bears it out.
You can count the number of newspapers in major cities that even have a Conservative on the editorial staff on one hand. The 3 major networks and PBS, MSNBC, CNN are so liberally-left leaning it's so obvious only a blind person could not see it. But then again, that proves the point...the leftists they pander to are too far-gone from anything balanced that to them this bias is just normal matter-of-fact ways of thinking.

CHRISISALL

Friday, November 30, 2007 6:23 PM

Lefty:
"Look, it's a tree, giving us life and oxygen- it has a right to live!!"
Liberal:
"Trees are good."
Conservative:
"It might serve us best as lumber for a house."
Neo-Con:
"Cut it down! It's roots might upset the sidewalk!"

Who's right and who's wrong here? The way the word is used, 'Liberal' these days seems to mean 'truthful'. If PBS does a story on returning vets getting the shaft, is that TRUE or FALSE? Liberal or Conservative? Hitler loved puppies, are puppies evil? Are they fascist?

WTF can't peeps just deal in facts w/out labeling them politically?
To me, the word 'political' means having an agenda not entirely in line with the best interests of the people- like, getting us into a war to boost sections of the economy and not REALLY fight terrorism is POLITICAL. Going after the Taliban in Afghanistan was NOT political in that way.

Out of gas momentarily Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Friday, November 30, 2007 6:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:

It's hardly a ridiculous claim....study after study bears it out.

Study after study showed that margarine was better for you than butter.

Liberal studies show that the media has a strong conservative bias.

'Meh' to all the official reports Chrisisall

JONGSSTRAW

Friday, November 30, 2007 6:40 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:

It's hardly a ridiculous claim....study after study bears it out.
Study after study showed that margarine was better for you than butter.

Liberal studies show that the media has a strong conservative bias.

'Meh' to all the official reports Chrisisall

So..if I understand you correctly...you're saying there is no reality in the world, only individual perceptions of reality. If that's what you mean I agree 100% with you. If you don't mean that, please tell me how you ever know what to believe or not.

CHRISISALL

Friday, November 30, 2007 7:01 PM

I've talked to real hard-core leftists that make a good case for the media being the lap dog of the conservatives, I've talked to hard-core conservatives that point out real liberal components and bias in the media...

(Sidebar: I grew up with a severely knee-jerk Conservative father, so of course I had to be severely knee-jerk liberal to counter him- yet I loved Dirty Harry movies...)

I come away feeling more Libertarian with each extreme discussion.

I do what I did with the margarine thing, as when I was 12 in the seventies...
"Gee, Dad, if butter has been in our diet for a really long time, and margarine has just been invented in a lab in 1940, how can you trust that it's so good for you, no matter what they say?"

I use intuitive common sense. Shortest point between two objects is a straight line. Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, etc.
And it's BY NO MEANS infallible, but it has seemed to serve me well overall.*

*Not recommended for those with psychotic tendancies

(c)Chrisisall

JONGSSTRAW

Friday, November 30, 2007 7:07 PM

I believe I do the same.....funny how 2 independently-minded people who are not overly influenced by social and political agenda propaganda can still see so many things so differently.

RUE

Friday, November 30, 2007 7:10 PM

"if you're saying there is no reality in the world, only individual perceptions of reality ... I agree 100% with you."

I invite you to step in front of a fast-moving semi.

***************************************************************
It's called walking the talk.

FREMDFIRMA

Friday, November 30, 2007 7:12 PM

Nice try Chris, nice try...

Some days I'm right glad to be an Anarchist, it means not having any position that you *must* defend beyond "keep yer grubby hands offa my life!", which is a personal, rather than political, one.

Beyond that there's no incentive nor requirement to take, hold, defend, or even stick with a position on anything at all, it even comes with the freedom to change your mind on any political topic at your own judgement if the evidence and situation seem to merit it in your own sole opinion.

And other Anarchists could care less, long as you don't push it on them.

It's quite liberating, honestly.

UltimateflipflopperyFrem.

CHRISISALL

Friday, November 30, 2007 7:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
I believe I do the same.....funny how 2 independently-minded people who are not overly influenced by social and political agenda propaganda can still see so many things so differently.

I don't believe we do see so many things differently, we just have different styles of reacting to them, maybe...

Lets see:
Gun control- leaves guns in the hands of the unlawful.
Abortion- hey, it ain't MY body or embryo...
God- I have dumb ideas of my own, so who am I to say he/she/it don't exist?
Drunk driving- if you can't drive well while drunk, you shouldn't!
Bush- means well, but there's only so much you can do with a 90 IQ.
Clinton- wuss.
The U.S. government perping 9-11- what? We don't already have ENOUGH conspiracy theories??
Taxes- destroy income tax and flat tax non-essentials and luxuries.
Military- keep 'em strong, well equipped and trained.
Gay marriage- whatever.
Israel- nice place, but I don't wanna pay for it.
Iran- bad place, but I don't wanna invade it.

Off the top of my head there, see if you find disagreement Jong- I'm curious...

Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Friday, November 30, 2007 7:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
it even comes with the freedom to change your mind on any political topic at your own judgement if the evidence and situation seem to merit it in your own sole opinion.

I have that.
Libertarian.
It's like when I say Wing Chun is my preferred martial art- in reality that's just to identify my art quickly- it's really comprised of several elements, some of which have no proper descriptive name.

Chrisisall-fu

CITIZEN

Friday, November 30, 2007 7:31 PM

My Tiger-Crane combination style will defeat you AUIsAll.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

CHRISISALL

Friday, November 30, 2007 7:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
My Tiger-Crane combination style will defeat you AUIsAll.

Not when I fall back on my Drunken Style!
*badly lip-synched*

Chanisall

CITIZEN

Friday, November 30, 2007 7:40 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Not when I fall back on my Drunken Style!
*badly lip-synched*

Chanisall

Your drunken style is strong, but my Ballet style will defeat it!

Works for VanDammeIsAll.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

JONGSSTRAW

Friday, November 30, 2007 7:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
I believe I do the same.....funny how 2 independently-minded people who are not overly influenced by social and political agenda propaganda can still see so many things so differently.
I don't believe we do see so many things differently, we just have different styles of reacting to them, maybe...

Lets see:
Gun control- leaves guns in the hands of the unlawful.
Abortion- hey, it ain't MY body or embryo...
God- I have dumb ideas of my own, so who am I to say he/she/it don't exist?
Drunk driving- if you can't drive well while drunk, you shouldn't!
Bush- means well, but there's only so much you can do with a 90 IQ.
Clinton- wuss.
The U.S. government perping 9-11- what? We don't already have ENOUGH conspiracy theories??
Taxes- destroy income tax and flat tax non-essentials and luxuries.
Military- keep 'em strong, well equipped and trained.
Gay marriage- whatever.
Israel- nice place, but I don't wanna pay for it.
Iran- bad place, but I don't wanna invade it.

Off the top of my head there, see if you find disagreement Jong- I'm curious...:
Chrisisall

Definitely 80% in agreement, possibly 90%...WTF?

THESOMNAMBULIST

Friday, November 30, 2007 7:42 PM

Er... Will there be snacks? I heard there would be snacks...

Ok. Whats the big picture here? Are you after truth, and justice? Are you after loyalty and honesty? Are you after an ideal?

Is that ideal peace, love and equality amoungst us all...? Are you after some kind of balance, a harmoniously shared amble through life and our time on this blue orb called earth....

Is it wrong that while I don't disagree with your plight, I truely think it unattainable. A dream. A wonderful dream nonetheless, but one I don't believe can happen.

If I give up the struggle to believe in it, am I as guilty as those that try and destroy it?

You know the difference between an optimist and a pessimist?

The optimist believes we live on the greatest of all worlds.... And the pessimist fears he is right.

RUE

Friday, November 30, 2007 8:07 PM

"The optimist believes we live on the greatest of all worlds.... And the pessimist fears he is right."

I believe there's much room for improvement - and we can get there if we want.
Where does that put me ?

***************************************************************
Some people only dream of going into space. Perhaps I'm already there.

Rue,Spacecadet,isall

RIGHTEOUS9

Friday, November 30, 2007 9:10 PM

One of these days one of you guys decrying the media's liberal bias is going to make the effort to explain the unexplainable...

What in god's name is the impetus that moves the pro-deregulation, commercial dependant, megacorporate media industry to buck its own powerful interests in favor of liberal values and things like anti-trust laws?

So you can find occasions where the media seems slanted in favor of, "gasp", HIllary Clinton, as if she were a liberal. I could find just as many and probably more examples of hatchet jobs the media has done on liberal democrats when it has come to it, whereas the preferred method is to ignore them, unless an opportunity arises to embarass them, in which case they are the talk of the day.

............

But without even going into all that tit-for-tat....give me a good reason why these big businesses with even bigger parent companies would shoot themselves in the foot? The system is working for them as it is, and there's nothing liberal about the way it has been working.

Seriously, one fucking reason, or I'm going to assume you're full of shit. Wait...don't tell me you haven't thought your own partisan bullshit through all the way to the why's of it? I'm shocked, truly...

CITIZEN

Friday, November 30, 2007 9:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
Seriously, one fucking reason, or I'm going to assume you're full of shit. Wait...don't tell me you haven't thought your own partisan bullshit through all the way to the why's of it? I'm shocked, truly...

Myself and Fletch have asked and stated just as much.

Let me tell you what they'll say:
But the Journalists are all Liberals!
But the companies/owners don't make the decisions!
But the editors don't make any decisions!
You're nothing but a delusional Liberal!

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

CHRISISALL

Friday, November 30, 2007 10:16 PM

I'm for being conservatively liberal.

OxyChrisisall

CHRISISALL

Friday, November 30, 2007 10:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:

Wait...don't tell me you haven't thought your own partisan bullshit through all the way to the why's of it? I'm shocked, truly...

Just curious here...who is that for? ('Cause if it's for my initial post, that wasn't me- that was the alternate reality me where I'm a Neo-Con...

)

Cwazy Cwisisall

THESOMNAMBULIST

Friday, November 30, 2007 11:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
I believe there's much room for improvement - and we can get there if we want.
Where does that put me ?

I'd would say an optimist.

CHRISISALL

Saturday, December 1, 2007 12:46 AM

Loving you new avatar, BTW Som.

C'est originale Chrisisall

THESOMNAMBULIST

Saturday, December 1, 2007 1:20 AM

Thanks 'C'

Was always a fan of your Bruce Lee one. Which film was that from, was it Enter the Dragon?

I just watched Jackie Chan's New Police Story. The guy is still going strong wid the crazy stunts :D What a legend.

A few weeks back I watched Jet Lee's Fearless. I dunno what it is about that guy but I don't like his stuff. I find him a touch removed from the material. Some nifty stunts though.

CHRISISALL

Saturday, December 1, 2007 1:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:

Was always a fan of your Bruce Lee one.

What- this old thing?

Fists Of Fury

Jet's stuff is uneven- I loved Hero though.

Heroisall

KIRKULES

Saturday, December 1, 2007 1:50 AM

Makes me want to get out my old Bruce Lee tee shirt. Fists of Fury is my personal favorite.

"Rock Chalk, Jayhawk, KU"

AURAPTOR

Saturday, December 1, 2007 2:24 AM

Bush is clearly smarter than the Left wing media is willing to admit. Smarter than Kerry, for sure.

The surge obviously is going well, even John Murtha admits it!!!

The Pentagon has been shown to be what it is, and efforts to correct it are being made. Seems to be a perpetual bureaucratic issue.

Rush's issues were his own. He didn't murder anyone else ( Ted Kennedy ) or run his car into any D.C. barracades ( Edward Kennedy Jr ) Rush is a private citizen, and not an elected official.

Fox News at least tells the truth, and doesn't plant subversives into its so called 'objecdtive' debate shows.

Thisain'tnewsRaptor

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

RUE

Saturday, December 1, 2007 2:46 AM

"The surge obviously is going well, even John Murtha admits it!!!"

OR

Reuters
Reporters Say Baghdad Too Dangerous Despite Surge
by David Morgan

The survey by the Washington-based Pew Research Center showed that many U.S. journalists believe coverage has painted too rosy a picture of the conflict.
A separate Pew poll released on Tuesday showed that 48 percent of Americans believe the U.S. military effort in Iraq is going very or fairly well ...
But most journalists said they believe violence and the threat of violence have increased during their tenures.
“Above all, the journalists — most of them veteran war correspondents — describe conditions in Iraq as the most perilous they have ever encountered, and this above everything else is influencing the reporting,” the authors said in a report that accompanied the data.

***************************************************************
Bush tells the truth, Bush knows best ... baaaaa baaaa baaaaa

RUE

Saturday, December 1, 2007 2:48 AM

"Fox News at least tells the truth, and doesn't plant subversives into its so called 'objecdtive' debate shows."

Wo planted the repubican in the democratic debate ? Just, you know - curious.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

AURAPTOR

Saturday, December 1, 2007 2:49 AM

Polls aren't objective facts. Pollees only reflect what a liberally biased media TELLS them, most of the time. Hard stats say otherwise about Iraq.

Again, even John Murtha was forced to admit it, AND HE WAS THERE TO SEE IT FOR HIMSELF! .

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

AURAPTOR

Saturday, December 1, 2007 2:51 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"Fox News at least tells the truth, and doesn't plant subversives into its so called 'objecdtive' debate shows."

Wo planted the repubican in the democratic debate ? Just, you know - curious.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

There were none. Just so , ya know.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

RUE

Saturday, December 1, 2007 3:05 AM

"Again, even John Murtha was forced to admit it, AND HE WAS THERE TO SEE IT FOR HIMSELF! ."

And the reporters don't ? I mean, they live there

"There were none. Just so , ya know."

There was at least one. Just so 'ya know.
"I'd like to know, if the Democrats come into office, are my taxes going to rise like usually they do when a Democrat gets into office?"

***************************************************************
Here are a few others:
"Tell me your position on gun control, as myself and other Americans really want to know if our babies are safe. This is my baby, purchased under the 1994 gun ban."
"Don't you think if we pulled out now that it would open it up for Iran and Syria, God knows who -- Russia -- how do we pull out now? And isn't it our responsibility to get these people up on their feet? I mean, do you leave a newborn baby to take care of himself? How do we pull out now?"
"you said "The entire deaths of Vietnam died in vain." I'd like to know if you plan to defend that statement, or if you're just going to flip-flop. Thanks."

CHRISISALL

Saturday, December 1, 2007 3:07 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Bush is clearly smarter than the Left wing media is willing to admit.

Left wing media....

Clearly this thread is a complete failure with some Browncoats.

Sad Chrisisall

AURAPTOR

Saturday, December 1, 2007 3:09 AM

Virtually all Dems have said they would raise taxes. That's not a plant. Sorry.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

AURAPTOR

Saturday, December 1, 2007 3:11 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Bush is clearly smarter than the Left wing media is willing to admit.

Left wing media....

Clearly this thread is a complete failure with some Browncoats.

Sad Chrisisall

Well, Chris, the U.S. main stream media is clearly 80% + Left wing.

That's undeniable. What's your problem ?

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

RUE

Saturday, December 1, 2007 3:13 AM

REALLY !!!

"I'd like to know, if the Democrats come into office, are my taxes going to rise like usually they do when a Democrat gets into office?"

"Tell me your position on gun control, as myself and other Americans really want to know if our babies are safe. This is my baby, purchased under the 1994 gun ban."

"Don't you think if we pulled out now that it would open it up for Iran and Syria, God knows who -- Russia -- how do we pull out now? And isn't it our responsibility to get these people up on their feet? I mean, do you leave a newborn baby to take care of himself? How do we pull out now?"

"you said "The entire deaths of Vietnam died in vain." I'd like to know if you plan to defend that statement, or if you're just going to flip-flop. Thanks."

Please tell me none of these are repubican talking points and language.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

RUE

Saturday, December 1, 2007 3:29 AM

"Well, Chris, the U.S. main stream media is clearly 80% + Left wing.
That's undeniable. What's your problem ?"

Yours is a lack of facts and logic.

***************************************************************
True believers of the world unite ! You have nothing to lose but your mind !

AURAPTOR

Saturday, December 1, 2007 3:40 AM

Quote:
Please tell me none of these are repubican talking points and language.

Cite for me the names of those giving the questions, which GOP campaign they worked for, or which GOP Congressional staff they were a member of, or which Conservative organization they belonged.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

RUE

Saturday, December 1, 2007 3:54 AM

Cite for me any rule which said democrats couldn't pose questions. You keep trying to believe that somehow democrats weren't supposed to ask questions, or that CNN wasn't supposed to pick them. Nothing could be further from the truth. So it doesn't matter how you slice, dice, spin, or spit, neither CNN nor anyone else did anything wrong.

In fact (trudge to the other thread) while CNN let certain 'bombshell' questions through for the democrats, it actively screened them out for repubicans. If anything, there was severe bias against the democrats.

"According to Bohrman, questions that "involve asking the candidates to defend their opposition to gay marriage and abortion," which Bohrman called "lobbying grenades," "would be disqualified by the CNN selection team." Yet, CNN gave no indication that it similarly weeded out Republican "gotchas" for the CNN/YouTube Democratic debate; indeed, several questions asked during that debate could be described as Republican "gotchas," including one in which the questioner echoed the enduring Republican myth of Democrats as taxers and spenders. CNN also aired two separate questions on same-sex marriage."

***************************************************************
True believers of the world unite ! You have nothing to lose but your mind !

OR

Never let facts stand in the way of your reality.

RUE

Saturday, December 1, 2007 4:09 AM

And please, please stop whining about how unfair CNN was to the repubicans for not favoring them even more than they did.

***************************************************************
And don't stomp your feet either. It's so unattractive in a grown man.

SIGNYM

Saturday, December 1, 2007 4:58 AM

Auraptor, I really don't get your point. (Nor Kirkules' either.)

What are you more upset about: That Democrats (gasp!) asked questions of Republican candidates, or that CNN didn't background check the questioners?

AFA the first point, WHY should questions be limited to a particular Party? It wasn't apparently against the rules, so.... ? What's the problem? It seems to me that you would get the best answers from candidates if they were asked tough questions. And that seems fair to me, seeing as some states (like ours) actually have "open primaries" where anyone can vote for anyone, irrespective of Party registration.

AFA the second point: What difference does it make if "How do you feel about gay marriage?" is asked by a trucker from Nebraska or a lesbian student from Boston? Are you (and other Republicans) so weak-minded that you can't separate the issues from the individuals? If so, I suggest that you grow a set of neurons. That'll help better than whinging.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

RIGHTEOUS9

Saturday, December 1, 2007 7:06 AM

Heh,

thanks citizen, of course now that you've summed up all of their firepower on the subject, I guess they won't see any need to respond to it themselves.

And no, Chrisisal, I understood the gist of your post. I was responding to Rap's and Jong's posts that followed yours.

FREMDFIRMA

Saturday, December 1, 2007 8:18 AM

I see your Drunken-Style and raise you the fine art of...

Gun-FU!
*Ker-chack!*

-Frem

Also knowing of Krow-Barr and Too-Bye-Forr!
WUAAGH!

CITIZEN

Saturday, December 1, 2007 10:54 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Polls aren't objective facts. Pollees only reflect what a liberally biased media TELLS them, most of the time. Hard stats say otherwise about Iraq.

You'll have no problem showing us these stats then will you.

Quote:
Again, even John Murtha was forced to admit it, AND HE WAS THERE TO SEE IT FOR HIMSELF! .

It's amazing how one guy telling you what you want to hear is more credible than all the others who have been there themselves and don't. Confirmation Bias?

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

JONGSSTRAW

Saturday, December 1, 2007 11:07 AM

This entire incident is just another action in an endlessly long and disgustingly absurd list of actions for years taken by gate-crashing, mob-mentality liberal ideologues who want to silence every traditional and conserative voice in America. Childish, punk pranks and outright boorish behavior of the lowest order...but far worse are the organizers, enablers and apologists for these planned disruptions and staged mini Watergates...except now it's mainstream to do it against Republicans and anyone else in America who doesn't support the ultra-left agendas of this new garlic-breathed MoveOn/KOS Democrat Party of thugs and haters.

AURAPTOR

Saturday, December 1, 2007 12:32 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
And please, please stop whining about how unfair CNN was to the repubicans for not favoring them even more than they did.

***************************************************************
And don't stomp your feet either. It's so unattractive in a grown man.

CNN didn't apologize for nothing. It's not me 'whining', they were wrong and admitted it. If they hadn't done anything, they'd not have apologized.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

CHRISISALL

Saturday, December 1, 2007 5:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Gun-FU!

Also knowing of Krow-Barr and Too-Bye-Forr!
WUAAGH!

My style encompasses both of those and more.

Electric cord-do Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Saturday, December 1, 2007 5:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Well, Chris, the U.S. main stream media is clearly 80% + Left wing.

That's undeniable. What's your problem ?

It IS deniable, watch:
I DENY IT.
See AU, you were wrong. I denied it. If you were wrong about that, how many other things can you be wrong about?
You can deny this, but it's true.

The media can swing far right or left depending on the issue and/or the pressure on the program directors.

Bottom line Chrisisall

THESOMNAMBULIST

Saturday, December 1, 2007 5:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:

Was always a fan of your Bruce Lee one.
What- this old thing?

Fists Of Fury

Thats the one! I like that.

Have you seen Ong Bak? Seriously a step up in terms of action/stunts/martial arts filming.

CHRISISALL

Saturday, December 1, 2007 5:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:

Have you seen Ong Bak? Seriously a step up in terms of action/stunts/martial arts filming.

Tony's insane- a good quality in an action star. Muy Thai never looked so good.

The physical Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Saturday, December 1, 2007 5:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
the ultra-left agendas of this new garlic-breathed MoveOn/KOS Democrat Party of thugs and haters.

It's of interest to me just what you see as being their agendas, other than getting the power away from the conservatives, that is.

And, is the garlic for vampires, or is that just their mob connection manifesting itself?

Wink-y Chrisisall

FREMDFIRMA

Saturday, December 1, 2007 9:01 PM

Nah, you use Garlic, Silver, Gold and other hard currency to repel tax-grafting, fiat-money cuddling spendthrift democrats, Chris..

And you use little rainbow stickers and purple triangles to repel holier than thou moral majority republicans, but only try that one on them in packs, cause they tend to get that moth and flame fascination going on when you try it on one that's alone, and that's just creepy!

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

AURAPTOR

Saturday, December 1, 2007 10:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Well, Chris, the U.S. main stream media is clearly 80% + Left wing.

That's undeniable. What's your problem ?

It IS deniable, watch:
I DENY IT.
See AU, you were wrong. I denied it. If you were wrong about that, how many other things can you be wrong about?
You can deny this, but it's true.

The media can swing far right or left depending on the issue and/or the pressure on the program directors.

The news media in the US is as Left wing as the Earth is round, as Oswald alone shot Kennedy, as Dinosaurs are extinct, etc.... UNDENIABLE in any rational, adult conversation.

Chris, you may continue to babble along all you want, but you're only humiliating yourself here.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

CAPTAINOLEY

Sunday, December 2, 2007 12:07 AM

I would just like to ask all of those on this thread who are so adamant about keeping Bush's tax cuts, how do you expect to pay off the 1.5 trillion dollar debt from the Iraq "war" that will have accumulated by the time he leaves office?

This was the funds that were in position to save social security for another 30 years or so, and now it is all gone.

Oley

"I have been on the right side of the chain of command."

AURAPTOR

Sunday, December 2, 2007 12:58 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by CaptainOley:
I would just like to ask all of those on this thread who are so adamant about keeping Bush's tax cuts, how do you expect to pay off the 1.5 trillion dollar debt from the Iraq "war" that will have accumulated by the time he leaves office?

This was the funds that were in position to save social security for another 30 years or so, and now it is all gone.

Oley

"I have been on the right side of the chain of command."

Easy. Cut spending. The tax cuts brought in more $$ to the US treasury and are helping erase the defecit already, while keeping the economy growing at a very reasonable rate.

Bush tried to save SSI, but no one wanted to touch that live wire. It's nothing more than a Gov't mandated Ponzi scheme, where the 1st ones in are the ones who come out winners. Since we've been lied to for decades by the FEDERAL Gov't ( note - both parites at fault here ) raising taxes is the last asd most morally bankrupt way to go.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

CAPTAINOLEY

Sunday, December 2, 2007 1:43 AM

ok cut spending. Got it. What would be the easiest way to save trillions? Stop occupying a nation that has been and will remain in constant conflict.

Get rid of the income tax and implement a national sales tax. That means the rich will have to pay every bit of the taxes that they owe from all of their luxuries, and illegal aliens have to pay taxes.

Oley

"Half of writing history is hiding the truth."
Mal

GEEZER

Sunday, December 2, 2007 2:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by CaptainOley:
Get rid of the income tax and implement a national sales tax. That means the rich will have to pay every bit of the taxes that they owe from all of their luxuries, and illegal aliens have to pay taxes.

And you immediately raise the cost of living for the poor by 25%.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

CHRISISALL

Sunday, December 2, 2007 3:33 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Chris, you may continue to babble along all you want, but you're only humiliating yourself here.

*unzips his fly, pees on AURaptor's shoe and sock, puts it away*

Sorry, what was that AU? I wasn't concentrating....

Chrisisall

AURAPTOR

Sunday, December 2, 2007 4:06 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by CaptainOley:
ok cut spending. Got it. What would be the easiest way to save trillions? Stop occupying a nation that has been and will remain in constant conflict.

Get rid of the income tax and implement a national sales tax. That means the rich will have to pay every bit of the taxes that they owe from all of their luxuries, and illegal aliens have to pay taxes.

Oley

I'm for the FAIR TAX, myself. Let's folks earn what they want, and only get taxed on what they buy, over the necessities of life. Stop duplicate social programs, do away w/ the Dept of Education, skim some $$ off of the Iraqi oil sales..we'll be right as rain in no time.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

AURAPTOR

Sunday, December 2, 2007 4:07 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Chris, you may continue to babble along all you want, but you're only humiliating yourself here.
*unzips his fly, pees on AURaptor's shoe and sock, puts it away*

Sorry, what was that AU? I wasn't concentrating....

I appreciate you wanting to cure my athlete's foot, but pee on your own feet, brother.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

KIRKULES

Sunday, December 2, 2007 5:58 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Easy. Cut spending. The tax cuts brought in more $$ to the US treasury and are helping erase the defecit already, while keeping the economy growing at a very reasonable rate.

Bush tried to save SSI, but no one wanted to touch that live wire. It's nothing more than a Gov't mandated Ponzi scheme, where the 1st ones in are the ones who come out winners. Since we've been lied to for decades by the FEDERAL Gov't ( note - both parites at fault here ) raising taxes is the last asd most morally bankrupt way to go.

As much as I agree with almost everything that Araptor posts, this is a rare disagreement. The US system of government is set up to benefit those in power that bring home the most bacon to their constituents. Hopes of cutting government spending are a pipe dreams. The most we can hope for is to maintain a tax cuts so the economy will continue to grow and deficits will fall due to the increasing tax base. As far social security is concerned the assumptions made by those that predict it's demise are very pessimistic. If the US economy continues to grow at the the rate of the last 30 years social security benefits will be just fine. Of course, because of demographic trends in the US this means the only way this can happen is if we develop a sensible way to bring foreign workers into our economy. Personally I think Mexican workers that come into our country legally could save the social security system. I work with them every day and they are polite and hard working. In my opinion exactly the infusion of new blood the US needs to maintain economic dominance into the next century. Plus, it could be worst we could have brought a couple of million Muslims into the country to do "work Americans won't do" and we would be in France's position now.

I had a few beers before this post is it obvious.

RUE

Sunday, December 2, 2007 6:05 AM

Rap, I kept hearing about 'rules' that were supposed to keep democrats out, but in real life (where most of the rest of us live) they didn't exist. So pardon me if I don't credit your whole 'they apologized 'cause they were wrong' schtick.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

KIRKULES

Sunday, December 2, 2007 6:22 AM

Rue , why don't you just except the fact that you don't understand the US political system and get over it. Nobody in the US cares if other countries want to have convoluted systems with 15 parties were everybody gets equally say. The US is a Republic, not a pure democracy and most like it that way. Pure democracy gets you Hugo Chavez. We let the ignorant masses vote in this country but we don't let the them make foreign policy.

RIGHTEOUS9

Sunday, December 2, 2007 7:24 AM

And under a republic we get Bush...

so I'm not seeing a whole lot of strength to your argument suggesting republics are better, Kirkules.

Seems like a goal of ours should not be the exclusion of the "ignorant masses" in the policy making department, but that it should be educating said masses, nationally prizing education, prizing public service, civic duty and social responsibility, because neither system can survive forever with an uneducated populace.

CAPTAINOLEY

Sunday, December 2, 2007 10:17 AM

"I'm for the FAIR TAX"
How is that any different than what I said?
I am for getting rid of the Department of Ed. too, let the states handle education, they are closer to the issue. I would say municipalities, but the the officials at that level are less equipped to deal with it than the state is.
Haven't seen any income come out of Iraq at all, instead of into the pockets of some Fat Cats who received uncontested contracts to do their dirty work over there.
Maybe we should knock off the mad man over in Pakistan and steal some of his. Or is he not bad enough for you? I smell hypocrisy is the answer is no.

SIGNYM

Sunday, December 2, 2007 11:01 AM

Quote:
Easy. Cut spending. The tax cuts brought in more $$ to the US treasury and are helping erase the defecit already, while keeping the economy growing at a very reasonable rate.

As several people have pointed out already the tax cuts led to DECLINING revenues in constant-dollars. (In other words, any increase in amount is less than an increase caused by inflation.) That's what the figures show. And "erasing the deficit"? Hmmm.... since Bush came into office with a surplus, who do you suppose caused the deficit? If you're so delusional about basic finance (1) I'd hate to see your checkbook and (2) Why should I trust you to come up with any reasonable tax scheme?

Quote:
skim some $$ off of the Iraqi oil sales.

Except we don't OWN the oil. the Iraqis do. Or... is this a backhand admission that the war was all about oil all along? Or are you going to say "We gave them freedom, so we take the oil"? Hmmm, there used to be another nation that said that.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

AURAPTOR

Sunday, December 2, 2007 1:45 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Rap, I kept hearing about 'rules' that were supposed to keep democrats out, but in real life (where most of the rest of us live) they didn't exist. So pardon me if I don't credit your whole 'they apologized 'cause they were wrong' schtick.

Your reply makes no sense, what so ever. Do try again.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

AURAPTOR

Sunday, December 2, 2007 1:54 PM

Sig, the tax cuts did indeed bring in more revenue to the treasury. That's a fact. Deal with it.

Bush came in w/ a PROJECTED surplus, one which was never achieved because of the recession, which began in the latter part of the Clinton/Gore eara. Bush OVER SPENT even before the war w/ Iraq, and continued to do so even after. From the farm subsidies to the perscription drug program, to the airline handout. Bush failed miserably when it came to being fiscally responsible. He hoped his generosity with OUR money would help solve the rift the Dems have caused in D.C. He was greatly mistaken.

I'm not 'delusional' about basic finance, I just happen to agree w/ what some of the brighter minds are saying about the issues.

Don't trust me, trust John Linder and Neal Boortz, who wrote - The Fair Tax Book .

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

AURAPTOR

Sunday, December 2, 2007 2:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
Rue , why don't you just except the fact that you don't understand the US political system and get over it. Nobody in the US cares if other countries want to have convoluted systems with 15 parties were everybody gets equally say. The US is a Republic, not a pure democracy and most like it that way. Pure democracy gets you Hugo Chavez. We let the ignorant masses vote in this country but we don't let the them make foreign policy.

I don't know where you got the idea I said we lived in a democracy. I'm fully aware the Founders were against the idea of a democracy. Fact is, too few know that the word 'democracy' doesn't even appear in Declaration of Independence,the U.S. Constitution, or ANY State Constiitutions. Democracies are little more than mob rule.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

KIRKULES

Sunday, December 2, 2007 2:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Sig, the tax cuts did indeed bring in more revenue to the treasury. That's a fact. Deal with it.

There is no question that cutting taxes can increase revenues. As most probably know this is demonstrated by the "Laffer Curve". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve There is however a point of diminishing return. This is also true of raising taxes. Raising taxes will generate more revenue to a point but when the penalty for working gets to high, revenues begin to fall. The trick is to to find the optimum taxation level to generate maximum revenue without discouraging hard work.

KIRKULES

Sunday, December 2, 2007 2:42 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
Rue , why don't you just except the fact that you don't understand the US political system and get over it. Nobody in the US cares if other countries want to have convoluted systems with 15 parties were everybody gets equally say. The US is a Republic, not a pure democracy and most like it that way. Pure democracy gets you Hugo Chavez. We let the ignorant masses vote in this country but we don't let the them make foreign policy.

I don't know where you got the idea I said we lived in a democracy.

Think you should read my post again. I was just trying to get Rue to drop the Republican debate nonsense.

CHRISISALL

Sunday, December 2, 2007 2:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Chris, you may continue to babble along all you want, but you're only humiliating yourself here.
*unzips his fly, pees on AURaptor's shoe and sock, puts it away*

Sorry, what was that AU? I wasn't concentrating....

I appreciate you wanting to cure my athlete's foot, but pee on your own feet, brother.

AU, the reason you vex me so is that much of what you post has truth to it- many of the hard facts are there, but certain key ones are ignored, or flat out turned around. You are SO CLOSE to truly understanding everything- but your ingrained bias makes the math impossible for you in the end.
I used to be just like you, albeit in the opposite direction. Everything the Republicans said were lies intended to further their evil plan of world domination and the end of civil rights. I credit Clinton with showing me the truth; no party has the franchise on being as*wipes. And where before I saw evil plans, I mostly now see bold ineptitude and bad planning.

AU, you need to get over yourself; you're no better at being 'the one who sees the truth' than anyone else. There is no one answer to any problem, just as there is rarely only one cause.

If I believe myself to see things more correctly than you (and I'll admit- boy do I

), it's only because I'm also more ready to believe I can be corrected on something if the info is presented to me. Perhaps when you reach your fourties, boy, you may acheive this flexibility...

Humble Chrisisall

AURAPTOR

Sunday, December 2, 2007 2:58 PM

Kirkules, oops, nevermind. I was flipping back and forth between post, early Sun. a.m., pre caffeine, etc...

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

AURAPTOR

Sunday, December 2, 2007 3:42 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:

AU, the reason you vex me so is that much of what you post has truth to it- many of the hard facts are there, but certain key ones are ignored, or flat out turned around. You are SO CLOSE to truly understanding everything- but your ingrained bias makes the math impossible for you in the end.
I used to be just like you, albeit in the opposite direction. Everything the Republicans said were lies intended to further their evil plan of world domination and the end of civil rights. I credit Clinton with showing me the truth; no party has the franchise on being as*wipes. And where before I saw evil plans, I mostly now see bold ineptitude and bad planning.

AU, you need to get over yourself; you're no better at being 'the one who sees the truth' than anyone else. There is no one answer to any problem, just as there is rarely only one cause.

If I believe myself to see things more correctly than you (and I'll admit- boy do I ), it's only because I'm also more ready to believe I can be corrected on something if the info is presented to me. Perhaps when you reach your fourties, boy, you may acheive this flexibility...

Humble Chrisisall

Of course you believe you see things more correctly than I, that's called egocentrism. It's more apparent in children, but most grow out of it, with age and experience. So, there's hope for you still.

My biases aren't ingrained, as you claim, but in fact are learned. I don't call Demcorats liars and communist simply becasue they oppose Republicans, but because they indeed are liars and communist. It's a trick I learned while growing up, to actually listen to what some folks say and then compare it to what they do.

I consider myself a skeptic, in areas beyond just politics, which should not be confused w/ being a cynic. Cynics tend to be on the defensive about everything, tend to be anarchist and propagandist ( like P.N. ) and lack the abilty to see goodness anywhere. It's like Mal and Saffron, where he catches up the her ( in Our Mrs Reynolds ) and she points out that he only won because he had a better hand - this time. Saffron sees people as pawns in a game, to be played with and against another. Where as Mal sees people as either trusted friends, allies, folk who will stick up for one another, or as villains, to be avoided or dealt with accordingly.

Not sure if that helps, but I just wanted to toss some Firefly in the thread somewhere.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

CITIZEN

Sunday, December 2, 2007 5:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
The US is a Republic, not a pure democracy and most like it that way. Pure democracy gets you Hugo Chavez.

Many people outside the US see George Bush as a more dangerous leader than Chavez, so it's hardly a conclusive argument.

Whether the US is a democracy or not depends on how you define 'democracy'. If by democracy you mean the original meaning, that of the system in use in Athens and Plato's warrior kings, then there is no democracy operating in the world today. However the accepted meaning of democracy today is one where the governing party is selected by vote, a definition the US fits in to.

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Of course you believe you see things more correctly than I, that's called egocentrism. It's more apparent in children, but most grow out of it, with age and experience. So, there's hope for you still.

Coming from the person who tells others they're idiots for not agreeing with him, and continually elevates his opinion to the level of unbiased undeniable fact, when it's nothing of the sort (and often in lieu of any coherent argument), all I can say is: let he who is without sin...

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

SIGNYM

Sunday, December 2, 2007 5:22 PM

Auraptor: Show me the Federal revenues - adjusted for inflation- which demonstrate that reducing taxes DID "increase revenues". Do it. Then come back to me. And remember: Google is your friend.
www.marktaw.com/culture_and_media/TheNationalDebt.html

Kirkules: The "Laffer curve" is a theoretical construct. It has never to my knowledge been demonstrated in real life. Can you provide data that shows the "Laffer curve" DID work in some instance, even if outside the USA?

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

CHRISISALL

Sunday, December 2, 2007 5:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

My biases aren't ingrained, as you claim, but in fact are learned.

Admitting to having biases is the first step toward dealing with them reasonably, and adjusting your views accordingly- bravo!

Quote:
I don't call Demcorats liars and communist simply becasue they oppose Republicans, but because they indeed are liars and communist.

Big step backwards here though-
Now you see why I (virtually) peed on your foot? You don't seem to bring out the adult in me with these kinds of posts.
Feel better, fellow Browncoat.

Chrisisall

AURAPTOR

Sunday, December 2, 2007 7:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Auraptor: Show me the Federal revenues - adjusted for inflation- which demonstrate that reducing taxes DID "increase revenues". Do it. Then come back to me. And remember: Google is your friend.
www.marktaw.com/culture_and_media/TheNationalDebt.html

Here's my reply -

Tax revenues in 2006 were 18.4 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), which is actually above the 20-year, 40-year, and 60-year historical averages.[1] The inflation-adjusted 20 percent tax revenue increase between 2004 and 2006 represents the largest two-year revenue surge since 1965–1967.[2] Claims that Americans are undertaxed by historical standards are patently false.

Some critics of President George W. Bush's tax policies concede that tax revenues exceed the historical average yet assert that revenues are historically low for economies in the fourth year of an expansion. Setting aside that some of these tax policies are partly responsible for that economic expansion, the numbers simply do not support this claim. Comparing tax revenues in the fourth fiscal year after the end of each of the past three recessions shows nearly equal tax revenues of:

18.4 percent of GDP in 1987,
18.5 percent of GDP in 1995, and
18.4 percent of GDP in 2006.[3]
While revenues as a percentage of GDP have not fully returned to pre-recession levels (20.9 percent in 2000), it is now clear that the pre-recession level was a major historical anomaly caused by a temporary stock market bubble.

[1] http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/bg2001.cfm#_ftn1
[2] http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/bg2001.cfm#_ftn2

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

SIGNYM

Sunday, December 2, 2007 7:17 PM

Auraptor: Think carefully about what you have just posted. Your statement flat contradicts the very point that you're trying to make. So give it some thought. I'm busy but I'll get back to you later.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

AURAPTOR

Sunday, December 2, 2007 7:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Auraptor: Think carefully about what you have just posted. Your statement flat contradicts the very point that you're trying to make. So give it some thought. I'm busy but I'll get back to you later.

Nope. It validates my reply. Thanks for playing.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

CHRISISALL

Sunday, December 2, 2007 7:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Auraptor: Think carefully about what you have just posted. Your statement flat contradicts the very point that you're trying to make.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
...He won't catch it Signy, but it put a big ole' smile on MY face!!!

Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Sunday, December 2, 2007 7:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Nope. It validates my reply. Thanks for playing.

Told ya.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!isall

KIRKULES

Sunday, December 2, 2007 7:55 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:

Kirkules: The "Laffer curve" is a theoretical construct. It has never to my knowledge been demonstrated in real life. Can you provide data that shows the "Laffer curve" DID work in some instance, even if outside the USA?

---------------------------------

I've heard a lot of evidence over the years that shows real world examples. Here's a link to an article by the man himself (Art Laffer). / http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/bg1765.cfm I've never felt the need to give it much thought, always just thought it is intuitive.

AURAPTOR

Sunday, December 2, 2007 7:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Nope. It validates my reply. Thanks for playing.

Told ya.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!isall

Dunno what your laughing about, it does prove what I was saying.

"Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." - John McCain

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

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

KIRKULES

Sunday, December 2, 2007 8:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
The US is a Republic, not a pure democracy and most like it that way. Pure democracy gets you Hugo Chavez.
Many people outside the US see George Bush as a more dangerous leader than Chavez, so it's hardly a conclusive argument.

Whether the US is a democracy or not depends on how you define 'democracy'. If by democracy you mean the original meaning, that of the system in use in Athens and Plato's warrior kings, then there is no democracy operating in the world today. However the accepted meaning of democracy today is one where the governing party is selected by vote, a definition the US fits in to.

Thanks for letting me know that the US is a democracy. I've been going to the polls all these years just to get the free "I Voted" sticker. Never occurred to me what they were doing behind the curtain.

If the election in Venezuela goes Chavez way you'll be able to enjoy his wacky antics for years to come. Unfortunately in a little more than a year you wont have Bush to kick around anymore.

CHRISISALL

Sunday, December 2, 2007 8:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Dunno what your laughing about, it does prove what I was saying.

Stop- yer killin' me AU!!!!

BTW, I made ya famous...

http://www.serenitymovie.org/browncoats/forums/index.php?showtopic=193
32&st=0&gopid=633050&#entry633050

Evil Chrisisall

CITIZEN

Sunday, December 2, 2007 8:47 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
Thanks for letting me know that the US is a democracy. I've been going to the polls all these years just to get the free "I Voted" sticker. Never occurred to me what they were doing behind the curtain.

You said the US wasn't a democracy, I merely pointed out that it was under the modern usage of the term, and gave my reasoning. I don't see your problem (assuming my reading of this as sarcasm is correct of course).

Quote:
If the election in Venezuela goes Chavez way you'll be able to enjoy his wacky antics for years to come. Unfortunately in a little more than a year you wont have Bush to kick around anymore.

Well I rather suspect that America will be feeling the effects of Bush's foreign policy for years to come. To be frank Chavez doesn't bother me, his 'wacky antics' are just that, I'm as worried as him as any other clown. George Bush is in control of the Worlds most powerful military, and has the potential to cause more real harm in the last days of his tenure than Chavez could do in his.

But that wasn't even my point. My point was that going on about how Chavez is the product of Democracy is a poor argument, because many, in fact maybe the majority, of people outside the US see Bush as worse. Its a bad argument for why Representative Republics are 'better' because its as equally valid to say parliamentary democracy is better because George Bush is the product of a Republic (or Jacques Chirac for that matter).

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

CHRISISALL

Sunday, December 2, 2007 9:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Its a bad argument for why Representative Republics are 'better' because its as equally valid to say parliamentary democracy is better because George Bush is the product of a Republic (or Jacques Chirac for that matter).

Citizen, I don't know how you feel about the quality of education in the UK, but just a suggestion, when talking to folks educated in the US, more specifically- ones from the US who also get all their news from commercial TV- dumb it down a wee bit, eh?

More of our money goes for war and TV commercials than learning institutions, y'know.

Breakin' it down fr'ya Chrisisall

RUE

Sunday, December 2, 2007 9:52 PM

I read the article and boy does that guy (Laffer) have some major errors.

"During the four years prior to 1925 (the year that the tax cut was fully implemented), inflation-adjusted revenues declined by an average of 9.2 percent per year. Over the four years following the tax-rate cuts, revenues remained volatile but averaged an inflation-adjusted gain of 0.1 percent per year. The economy responded strongly to the tax cuts, with output nearly doubling and unemployment falling sharply."
Followed thereafter by a spectacular crash since much of the 'economic activity' was speculation. Not sure how he ignores that leeetle fact, or how you do for that matter.

Moving on ...

The Kennedy tax cuts didn't take effect until Johnson took office. Here are some economic figures:
"Kennedy 1962-1965
The economy grew each year of the Kennedy "term" by rates of 6.0%, 4.3%, 5.8% and 6.4%, respectively. Those four years average 5.6% GDP growth.
Johnson 1966-1969
The economy grew each year of the Johnson "term" by rates of 6.6%, 2.5%, 4.8% and 3.0%, respectively. Those four years average 4.2% GDP growth."

And this:
"The Kennedy administration's estimates of the nation's long-run economic and fiscal position turned out to be seriously in error. The economy did not grow by 4% per annum. It grew from 1963 to 1995 by an average of 3% per annum - which is an error of 25%, not 1%. We did not face the problem of mounting full-employment surpluses that would be a drag upon the economy because they would depress demand. Instead we faced the problem of large, persistent deficits that depressed the economy by depriving it of savings for investment."

As to Reagan's tax cuts, let me just link you to this: http://www.forbes.com/2004/07/20/cx_da_0720presidents.html

And quoting and linking this:
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/5Debt.htm
his chart raises two points. First, it allows you to see that real tax collections actually declined in the two years following Reagan's 1981 tax cuts. (In fact, it took until 1985 to recover the 1981 level.) This is exactly the opposite of what supply-siders had predicted. They excuse it by noting that the 1981 cuts were phased in over three years, delaying entrepreneurial investment. But, according to their theory, accumulating tax cuts should have resulted in accumulating -- not declining -- tax collections.

These last two links cover long periods and indicate - by any measure you choose whether it's federal deficits, gdp, employment etc, supply-siders had far worse economies overall.

BTW, many thing are 'intuitive' - but severely wrong. It's 'intuitive' the earth is flat. It's 'intuitive' the sun moves through the sky. Intuition without solid data is mere voodoo.

***************************************************************
Voodoo Economics
A slanderous term used by President George H. W. Bush in reference to President Reagan's economic policies known as Reaganomics.

CHRISISALL

Sunday, December 2, 2007 10:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:

BTW, many thing are 'intuitive' - but severely wrong. It's 'intuitive' the earth is flat.

Actually Rue, it was intuitive to me as a child that the Earth is round; go up on any mountain and tell me you don't see the curve. Also, why wouldn't you be able to see China from here...and why do boats disappear at the horizon?
BTW, I don't think 'intuitive' is the right word here (my Wife thinks not, & she's always right...)

maybe 'obvious'(?)Chrisisall

KIRKULES

Monday, December 3, 2007 12:02 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
Thanks for letting me know that the US is a democracy. I've been going to the polls all these years just to get the free "I Voted" sticker. Never occurred to me what they were doing behind the curtain.

You said the US wasn't a democracy, I merely pointed out that it was under the modern usage of the term, and gave my reasoning. I don't see your problem (assuming my reading of this as sarcasm is correct of course).

If the election in Venezuela goes Chavez way you'll be able to enjoy his wacky antics for years to come. Unfortunately in a little more than a year you wont have Bush to kick around anymore.

Well I rather suspect that America will be feeling the effects of Bush's foreign policy for years to come. To be frank Chavez doesn't bother me, his 'wacky antics' are just that, I'm as worried as him as any other clown. George Bush is in control of the Worlds most powerful military, and has the potential to cause more real harm in the last days of his tenure than Chavez could do in his.

But that wasn't even my point. My point was that going on about how Chavez is the product of Democracy is a poor argument, because many, in fact maybe the majority, of people outside the US see Bush as worse. Its a bad argument for why Representative Republics are 'better' because its as equally valid to say parliamentary democracy is better because George Bush is the product of a Republic (or Jacques Chirac for that matter).

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

Did you even bother to read what I wrote. Were did I say that a Republic is better than any other form of government. I also never said that the US isn't a democracy, I said its a Republic as apposed to a "pure democracy". My point was that some don't seem to understand the traditions and customs of our election process because they live under other forms of democracy. I know that the traditions of a parliamentary democracy are much different than our own and wouldn't begin to pretend that I now them better than someone that has lived under and studied that system of government their whole life.

KIRKULES

Monday, December 3, 2007 12:58 AM

Apparently some here are quick to dismiss the "Laffer Curve" because it has been used by many conservatives to justify tax cuts. Their bias has caused them to misunderstand the application of the curve. The Laffer curve does not predict that any tax cut will generate more revenue. It only says that if taxes are to high it is possible to cut taxes and not lose revenue because the difference will be made up by the increased economic activity caused by the tax cut. Same reasoning works the other way around. If taxes are to low you can raise taxes, collect more revenue and have no detrimental effect on the economy.

When I first heard Darwin's Theory of evolution it just felt right. I felt that way when I first studied the Laffer Curve. A sociology teacher once told me that "first impressions last" and I believe this is true. Someone might be able to convince me the the Laffer curve is wrong, but I doubt it will happen in this thread.

FLETCH2

Monday, December 3, 2007 5:45 AM

There is no problem with the curve just its application. If we assume for the moment that the curve is correct then for tax cuts to generate enough economic activity to offset the revenue losses the current tax position has to be to the right of the curve out beyond the maxima. Since there is no scale on the X axis and since the exact point of the "maxima" varies from economy to economy where you are on the curve becomes a very subjective opinion.

I used to believe that there was observer bias in the interpretation of a country's position in the curve -- that if you favour lower taxes you tend to believe that the economy is to the right of the curve and that if you think the tax regime is fair then you see it being at the left. Now I'm of the opinion it doesn't matter because the purpose of the curve in political discourse is not to predict an optimal tax rate but to give some legitimacy to people that just want to cut taxes. Most people realize that taxes pay for government services, less taxes means less revenue which means fewer services. An honest advocate of lower taxes would have to deal with those questions, explain what would be cut and why and deal with the political repercussions.

What some have chosen to do instead is to use the curve as a dishonest political shell game at the public's expense. In effect they tell the voter that tax cuts today will be offset by the improved economic activity completely, which means that cuts will not result in cut programs and heads off political backlash and any honest discussion of the cuts.

Of course later the government finances become a mess because there is no corresponding rise in revenue. At that point it becomes necessary to cut programs in order to restore the budget. Thus the curve is used as a distraction to avoid the public discourse that would accompany a legitimate tax/program cut.

I believe they call this technique "starving the beast."

FREMDFIRMA

Monday, December 3, 2007 8:53 AM

You know...

I don't get why folks delude themselves into thinking that it's a republic or a democracy, when it's clearly and in practice a Totalarianist Corporate Oligarchy - which is what I been calling it since 1980 when a well meaning teacher asked me what kind of Government we had.

I looked in the book, compared what I saw with what was listed, and told her that* - she looked a bit stricken and changed the subject.

"Cynics tend to be on the defensive about everything, tend to be anarchist.."

People become Cynics, become Anarchists, even, because of being lied to, and catching people doing it to them, over and over, because of never getting a straight answer, and watching the disasters that occur when other people meekly accept lies or justifications that leak like a sieve, and then obey not because it's a good idea, but because they fear the threat or coercive force of the powers that be.

When a child sees this stuff, without an innate bias pressed upon them by a family, well-meaning or not, they form their own conclusions based on the evidence in front of them, and thus become cynical, disrespectful of authority and anarchic in nature.

I saw it from inside, and now by watching my niece, I get to see the same exact process from outside - and it is a process, sparked by being lied to, accellerated by never getting a straight and honest answer, and fully calcified when deception fails and authority figures rip the mask off and reveal the true violent and coercive nature of "authority" for what it really is.

Cynics and Anarchists are whatcha call allergic to kool-aid, of any brand or flavor.

And it is the dishonesty and evasiveness of adults and authority figures, who are by their very nature dishonest in almost every respect to children - which creates that allergy.

-Frem

* I asked my niece, who had no knowledge of my original answer, and after scanning her somewhat dumbed down civics text, responded.
"We're a totalarian form of government"

Maybe it's genetic, I dunno - it's the same school, which is very oppressive and decietful in it's practices... I just hope she doesn't repeat the rest of that awful history...

CITIZEN

Monday, December 3, 2007 10:02 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
Did you even bother to read what I wrote.

Yes I did, perhaps you should try being clearer to save confusion?

Quote:
Were did I say that a Republic is better than any other form of government.

Right here:

Quote:
The US is a Republic, not a pure democracy and most like it that way. Pure democracy gets you Hugo Chavez. We let the ignorant masses vote in this country but we don't let the them make foreign policy.

Or are we going to play the "I didn't expressly say the words, despite the meaning of my post being clear" game?

Quote:
I also never said that the US isn't a democracy, I said its a Republic as apposed to a "pure democracy".

I know what you said, and pure democracy as opposed to democracy is an arbitrary distinction, as I indicated earlier. My first post indicated as much, did you read it, or were you too busy getting worked up at me? I very expressly said that it depended on your meaning, and I have no idea what you mean by 'pure democracy'. The current meaning of the word democracy is a country with an elective system of government, so a pure democracy is what, a country where the elective process is 'pure', unlike Iran that has its candidates chosen by the religious authority? Pure democracy is an arbitrary term, I gave you the opportunity to indicate what you meant by it earlier, you chose to become snarky and sarcastic so don't blame me for any misunderstanding.

Quote:
My point was that some don't seem to understand the traditions and customs of our election process because they live under other forms of democracy.

Actually I believe Rue is American, I say this because you're original post was squarely directed at Rue.

Quote:
I know that the traditions of a parliamentary democracy are much different than our own and wouldn't begin to pretend that I now them better than someone that has lived under and studied that system of government their whole life.

Which is a big difference to indicating Republics are better than 'pure Democracies' because 'pure democracies' give you Hugo Chavez, and expecting people to know what you mean with your arbitrary term of 'pure democracy'. A Parliamentary Democracy is no more or less inherently a democracy than a Republic.

To my mind a pure democracy would be Athenian Democracy (being the originator of the idea), or an elective system where candidates or votes aren't 'filtered' to ensure the status quo. So you could help me out by telling me what you mean by a 'pure democracy', or you can be sarcastic and accusatory again, whatever.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

1 2 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE