" No talk about cutting taxes...then going to war on borrowed money? This is the reason our government is broke and we have a deficit never before experienced in our history. And it doesn't seem like very sound conservatism to me. Looks like Santa used his Mastercard this Christmas. "

" "...then going to war on borrowed money? This is the reason our government is broke and we have a deficit never before experienced in our history." - Our government was "broke" long before the 2003 invasion of Iraq. By definition, deficit spending means spending money you don't have. Deficit spending is the rule in the US, and has been for quite some time. Reasons for this are varied, but since this is the opinion page, allow me to express mine: We never cut spending. Ever. Military, social, agricultural, whatever. We might juggle the buckets a bit, stealing from one aspect of our government's budget to pay another, but the overall effect is NEVER negative. That's a problem, no matter which party you support. This country cannot continue to allow its politicians to buy our votes by promising to pay for things. Whether its an F-22 jet to "win the war on terror" if your a conservative or universal health insurance to help those "without health care" if your a lib, it all costs money. Where is the discussion about which antiquated programs we can effectively cancel? Where is the belt tightening that you or I would have to undertake to rein in our budget? It doesn't exist in either party in Washington. "

" Again Clayson is right on every observation he makes. The liberals only want to tax the wealthy more, and business more, until they break the country by getting less investment and less production. Santa and the magic-entitlement-man want our money to pay for their programs.

Posters will come on again to say oh but noone will take care of the poor as well as the government. the poor need us to succeed. To use their favorite word 'baloney'

Let's stop relying only on those who invest, save and work hard in this country to create more government and more freebies to those that dont work hard and invest. And stop whining about helping those who really need our help. of course we can help the truly needy, just not those who can do better themselves with hard work.

We must also stop allowing the green machine and fear mongerers promoting global warmth to drain the future strength of this country. When the liberals in california and new york clean up their states first, they can start talking about the rest of us. "

" the deficit is what it is because of congress, not necessarily the president. we have too many programs that govt. has no business being involved in. we don't need to raise taxes to pay for these programs, we need to cut the programs or make them more efficient...and govt. and efficiency are rarely if ever hand in hand. the current administration is spending for the war, however things will only become more expensive so why is it any surprise that the deficit is the highest its been...? lets not forget congress role in spending....its not just the president. "

" This week, Prof. Clayson returns to one of his pet peeves: taxes. (My file of prior essays responding to his columns already has one major and several minor responses on his objections to taxes. Rather that repeating what I’ve said before, I’ll try go give some new reasons why he’s still wrong.)

I’ll start with Prof. Clayson’s conclusion: “I can give you an absolute guarantee. If the next government doesn't cut spending, and if it raises taxes and further restricts free exchanges, the current economic malaise will look inviting compared to the extended economic problems we will face for years and years to come.”

In other words, he concludes: “If we don’t return to the economic views of President Herbert Hoover, then we’ll have economic problems as bad as under President Hoover.”

Huh?

Well, he didn’t say that he was a “Neanderthal conservative” for nothing. He wants the government to stop all “social engineering.” And, in Prof. Clayson’s world, “social engineering” apparently includes:

* universal health care

* protection from foreclosures on bad loans

* educating everyone to whatever level anyone desires

* taking care of the aged

* taking care of the young

* taking care of the sick

* taking care of the addicted

* taking care of the sad, and

* taking care of the confused.

I suspect that his list of things government should avoid probably agrees with Louis XVI. In any case, Prof. Clayson is pining for a government that hasn’t existed for a hundred years – if ever. That our government is to be activist in solving the collective problems of the people is a battle that folks of Prof. Clayson’s political philosophy lost a long time ago. And, we are not going back to it no matter what Prof. Clayson hopes for.

Along the way to his conclusion, Prof. Clayson allows: “Yes, and we can raise more money. That grand philosopher back in 1875 stated what we all now believe: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!”

Oh, baloney.

He’s talking about Marx’s famous dictum of the principles of communism. And, contrary to what he says that we “ALL” now believe in Marx’s communism, I doubt that there is much of anyone around Iowa who believes that. I’d challenge Prof. Clayson to either prove that statement or retract it.

Prof. Clayson says, “We need to tax "the rich" more. We can tax the profits of "big" business more. Why Lord Almighty! We need to use the power of the government to level the proud and elevate the humble.”

That is yet more baloney.

Again, Prof. Clayson is writing as if liberals, progressives, Democrats, Socialists, and Communists are all the same thing and that they are all on a moral quest to destroy those in upper income brackets. But, the fact is that all anybody is talking about is restoring the rate of taxation on upper brackets to what it was before President Bush sliced the income tax on the upper brackets to the bone in the last seven years. And even that tax rate is a long way from the 90% top bracket that existed in the 40s and 50s. Nobody in making a Marxist tirade about “getting” the rich.

And, Prof. Clayson's perpetual attempts to say:

liberals = progressives = Democrats = Socialists = Communists = dictators

is as offensive as it is historically and practically WRONG. Prof. Clayson repetition of that characterization doesn't make it any truer.

Prof. Clayson says, “If we tax the rich, we will get less of the rich. .... The amount of money extracted from the rich will actually decrease as their tax rates increase. If you don't understand that, I invite you to take an econ course.”

More baloney.

I’ve taken ECON 101 and a bunch of other economics courses totaling enough for a minor in the subject. However, I don’t recognize the economic law that Prof. Clayson cites. Maybe he’s saying not an economic law but just claiming that the rich will just move their income offshore. If so, there are enforcement mechanisms to prevent that. Or, perhaps he’s referring to the late, great, but un-lamented “Laffer Curve.” But even that referred to tax rates recovering the same level of revenue and not reduced revenue. The way Prof. Clayson state the economic principle, it would mean that if we reduce the tax on the rich to zero then the amount of revenue recovered would be infinite. And, no matter how you slice it, that’s an obviously faulty conclusion.

In the end, I do not think that Prof. Clayson is a follower of “Neanderthal” economic principles. I suspect that his ultimate economic principle is, “I’ve got mine, Jack.” And that is a principal not of Neanderthal economics but, rather, Philistine economics. "

" cross, you do realize you aren't any different than clayson? maybe you are clayson?

regardless, you don't bring anything to the table.

the point about the rich, is simple. the more you tax (interfere) those who create an economy, the less efficient the economy is, thus less tax is ultimately collected. you have to realize that money doesn't grow on trees. there are those who advocate for the govt. to control the money and there are those who believe that money should be free-flowing and those who earn it should be entitled to it. "

" I have only one question. How have those tax cuts for the upper income brackets helped our economy? It looks to me like...not very much. "

" Seems to me, when I look at our economy, that the guy in the red suit isn't Santa, he's the Grinch. "

" Cross, where did you get the reference to Hoover in Clayson's Opinion Piece? I've read it three times and can't find any reference to Hoover.

Again you seem to be doing what you acuse others of doing to your opinions. (Rewriteing it into something easier to attack.)

Also, why do you only respond to Clayson's pieces? Seems like you have a personal vendeta against Clayson. Which puts all your responces to him in question. "

" MAC, why pick out one group...you forget tax cuts came to the lower and middle classes as well....and for that matter, why should the upper income brackets be taxed at a higher rate? whats the purpose? "

" Leo46 @ Jul 14, 2008 7:58 AM asked, "Cross, where did you get the reference to Hoover in Clayson's Opinion Piece? I've read it three times and can't find any reference to Hoover."

Me: I am paraphrasing what Prof. Clayson said. That's why I said, "In other words...."

He also says, "Again you seem to be doing what you accuse others of doing to your opinions. (Rewriting it into something easier to attack.)"

Me: Ah, so you DID understand what I said. Yes, there is the possibility that my paraphrase isn't valid even to make my point. I think it's valid because during the Great Depression, Pres. Hoover maintained that he had no power to intervene. Readers will have to judge that.

He also said: "Also, why do you only respond to Clayson's pieces? Seems like you have a personal vendetta against Clayson. Which puts all your responses to him in question."

Actually, on rare occasions, I have responded to other columns and news items. I respond to Prof. Clayson every week because I find that he has every week he writes drivel and it's oh so prominently displayed every week. Once upon a time, I just read his column and marveled at the nonsense he spouted. Then, one Sunday, he had a column about why we're in Iraq. Prof. Clayson said, "President Bush was a victim of bad intelligence so I'll give him a pass on that." I just blew a cork. "

" wcf reader @ Jul 14, 2008 8:14 AM said, "MAC, why pick out one group...you forget tax cuts came to the lower and middle classes as well."

Baloney.

The rich have had their taxes lowered by millions of dollars. The poor have had their taxes lowered by pocket change. "

" Mr. Clayson says: "If you don't understand that, I invite you to take an econ course."

Apparently Mr. Clayson dropped out or flunked the econ class he took - if he took one.

It seems to me the only people who complained about the tax rates back in the 1990's when we were in the process of paying off the deficit were the wealthy. Guess whose tax rates were cut significantly since then? The economy was humming - can't seem to remember any burdensome tax rates dragging us into recession.

One point everyone can agree on - including Mr. Clayson - is to cut spending. The question is where. The obvious answer is the military. We have become an corporate empire. We have bases in over 100 countries - why? Who is going to invade Europe? Japan? The USA? The main reason we get attacked is because we have troops in just about everybodies back yard. The troops aren't there to protect our "freedom", unless you consider the holdings of Exxon or IBM part of your freedom.

Cut the military budget by 80%. Savings - $400-600 Billion.

Get rid of the millions spent subsidizing private insurance company's Medicare plans.

Allow the government to negotiate for lower drug costs for senior citizens on Medicare. Savings - millions if not billions annually.

Finally make all government employees buy their own health insurance - from the President on down to Mr. Clayson and all state university employees. Direct from the insurance companies - no group rates. Save the government millions annually - plus give the Dennis Claysons of the world some perspective. "

" In 2010 tax rates will automatically revert to pre-Bush levels, since Democrats insisted the tax cuts have a sunset clause. So, if nothing happens, everyone that pays federal income taxes will get hit with a significant tax increase. This will make liberals happy, though, so it's OK. I hope anyone planning on buying new big ticket items, like automobiles, campers, boats, houses, etc. considers this and changes their mind before taking on debt they may not be able to pay, causing a slow down in the economy and the laying off of workers that make these things, also making liberals happy.
Clayson, as usual, is right, and Cross+ as usual are wrong. Again. The tax cuts helped the economy AND raised government revenues, but congress, being congress, used this as another blank check in their vote buying schemes and liberal gimme projects. And our spineless president, trying to get along with leftwingers, didn't veto any of it. And of course, the Supreme court refuses to look for Constitutional justification for this largess. And that makes liberals happy. And that's all that matters.

One thing Cross was somewhat right about was the bit on I got mine Jack. He left out the rest of it. I got mine Jack, here's how I did it, now go get yours. I'll even help a little.

Pursuit of happiness means you have to get off your duff and go after it.

We shouldn't confuse government vote buying schemes with charity, either.

But liberals are happy. And that's all that counts. "

" By the way - who said this on Sunday relating to Mr. Clayson's topic last week?

It just really means basically this administration did not believe in global warming, or they did not believe that they should do anything about it since China is not doing anything about it and since India is not willing to do the same thing, so why should we do the same thing?

But that’s not how we put a man on the moon. We did not say let everyone else do the same thing, then we will do it. We said we want to be the pioneers, we want to be out there in front. [snip]

Anyone that tells you that drilling, nuclear power, alternative fuels, fuel cells, solar, all of those things will bring down the price right now, I think is pulling wool over your eyes, because we know that all of those would take at least 10 years.

But that should not mean that we should not do those things, because here is the important thing. What’s the biggest problem in America? It’s not that we don’t have any ideas. It’s just that we are not consistent, that we have Jimmy Carter in the late ’70s that came in with a great energy policy, talked about shale oil exploration, giving tax credits for people that were investing in windmills and in solar and all of those things.

Then President Reagan came in and scrapped the whole thing, because the oil price came down and says, “Well, this doesn’t make any sense financially.”

There were many countries all over the world that stayed with the program, that said, “We are going to continue,” even thought the oil price comes down. In Germany with solar, for 30 years they’ve been working on that, and they’re now number one in solar, number one.

I think that’s what we need to do. We need to stay the course.

The current Republican Governor of California. "

" The poor had their taxes lowered by pocket change. What does that mean? Who do you mean by the poor? Earning less than 10k? Less than 20k? Those folks, or should I say you folks, already payed little or no taxes to begin with. You can't cut taxes on someone who already pays none. Who pays most of the income tax in this country? The top 50% of acheivers, or the bottom? Spin spin spin like a top. "

" "The rich have had their taxes lowered by millions of dollars. The poor have had their taxes lowered by pocket change."

wow, how long did it take you to figure that out? too bad you can't understand that the rich pay more than the poor in taxes. so if there is a 2 percent tax break across the board, those who pay more, will receive more back.

but if you can't get that, let me help you more...the rich pay millions in taxes, the poor pay pocket change in taxes...so when it comes to cuts, its relative to what you pay! figure it out, its a simple concept, but its a fundamental flaw in yours and other dems thought process "

" "The tax cuts helped the economy AND raised government revenues, but congress, being congress, used this as another blank check in their vote buying schemes and liberal gimme projects"

Right - that's why we went from a surplus to a deficit.

It's an urban legend that tax cuts increase government revenues. When Reagan said it they had to issue a correction - the President "misspoke" they said. And the ignorant keep repeating it.

By the way who was in control of Congress when these tax cuts were passed - you know the ones we didn't need? "

" "It's an urban legend that tax cuts increase government revenues. When Reagan said it they had to issue a correction - the President "misspoke" they said. And the ignorant keep repeating it." You're the one with the urban legends.

Nonsense. Kennedy, Reagan, BushII all had the same results. The economy and tax revenues increased. Laffer curve. "

" Hey Phil, how about having everybody buy our own health insurance, instead of forcing employers to do it? "

" "xdfred" and "wcf reader" are of the same mind. They ask, "the poor didn't get much back in the tax cuts because they didn't pay much in taxes originally."

I should have seen that one coming.

Taxes were reduced by a percentage and not by a fixed amount precisely because that way it's the rich who get the lion's share of the money. More can go back to the poor -- even to the point of having negative taxes. (That is, even if you paid no taxes because of low income, you still get a tax "refund.") And, when you have multiple rounds of tax cuts, the rich get multiple rounds of big breaks.

And, BTW, what happens when the rich get tax cuts? It goes straight into savings. When the poor get tax cuts, it goes into buying food and paying for the other expenses of just living. And that spending has a multiplier effect on the whole economy. The savings by the rich does not.

It's all a matter of which group you want to take care of first. And the Republicans, who arranged for the tax cuts, wanted to take care of the rich first. "

" The biggest difference i see in the left vs the right is this; the left needs, desires, craves huge government and huge tax receipts to pay for their huge entitlement programs. The right wants to hold to the view of the Constitution on most issues; namely states should have the most rights not federal government.

Why do we have to bail out everyone who has made their own decisions on taking out loans or making poor financial decisions? Our tax money was NEVER meant for that.

Why does the left want to establish a system of handouts for whiners across our country?

The US is the strongest and wealthiest country in the world. We have to take back our country from the left who wants to do nothing but ruin it.

One may only look at how Ol' Nancy Pelosi pooh-poohed the President today on canceling the presidential proclamation, thus ending oil drilling bans. Nancy will now kill any bill headed her way by those who want to strengthen our country.

Typical left-winger. I see we have several of her disciples in our own little corner of Iowa, after reading Phil, Cross, 50674 and others who want to bleed the country.

Vote no to Barack H. Obama and the rest of the liberal fear factors this fall! "

" hetfield @ Jul 14, 2008 5:25 PM said, "The biggest difference i see in the left vs the right is this; the left needs, desires, craves huge government and huge tax receipts to pay for their huge entitlement programs."

Entitlement programs? Like the Iraq War?

Entitlement programs? Like defense spending on a anti-missile missile that doesn't work?

Entitlement programs? Like a boarder fence with Mexico that people can go over, under, around, and through and that ends at several places between the Gulf and the Pacific?

Oh, come on, hetfield. After what those on the hard-right have spent, you really can't complain of Democrats being spendthrifts anymore. "

" "Taxes were reduced by a percentage and not by a fixed amount precisely because that way it's the rich who get the lion's share of the money."

yeah, because the rich pay the lion's share of the taxes...what don't you understand. if everybody gets a cut of 3 percent, its equal for everyone...

but i get it, its unfair because they get more in their bank account back, so its not fair. no mind the fact the before the cuts they paid more to begin with. not everybody is equal...

what is fair about giving more back to people who paid less?

regardless, you are also wrong for the fact that when rich get tax cuts, it doesn't go into savings. it goes into investments. rich people put their money to work...that's how many got to the point they are...

typical response... "

" "It's all a matter of which group you want to take care of first. And the Republicans, who arranged for the tax cuts, wanted to take care of the rich first. "

i find this to be b.s. because all groups got cuts, and so ultimately they are all being taken care of. "

" Cross, as I clearly pointed out, your examples ARE the differences in the left and right. The Constitution states the federal government is supposed to protect our country. The examples you point out were exactly where federal monies should be going to!

Thanks Cross! "

" Lets see, the top 1 percent of earners are now paying 40 percent of the total federal income taxes. But they only make about 17 percent of the total income. How can this be fair? The bottom 50 percent of wage earners pay only 3 percent of income taxes. Who is getting the free ride? The achievers once again pay through the nose. This looks like a plan to stiffle achivement.
Next time you want a job, go ask a poor person for one. They are the "anointed ones" according to the liberals. "

" "wcf reader" you can only imagine my surprise that you are quite happy with Republican tax cuts taking care of the rich first. "

" hetfield, I kinda thought you were a believer in "Carry the mail, defend the shores, and get the heck out of my life." "

" “Taxes were reduced by a percentage and not by a fixed amount precisely because that way it's the rich who get the lion's share of the money. More can go back to the poor -- even to the point of having negative taxes. (That is, even if you paid no taxes because of low income, you still get a tax "refund.") And, when you have multiple rounds of tax cuts, the rich get multiple rounds of big breaks.”

Interesting take. However, the current tax payment scheme is progressive in nature. High earners pay more on a percentage basis as well. So in real dollars, higher income brackets pay significantly more than low earners. Right, wrong, or indifferent, that is the way the system works. So, how is it fair to collect on a progressively increasing percentage basis, but refund based on a fixed amount? That seems, at best, logically inconsistent. At worst, it is changing the rules in the middle of the game. If you want to argue in favor of a flat tax, I’d be right there with you on the refunds. Under the current system, what you propose is little more than wealth re-distribution for its own sake. "

" cross, you got it! except for the mail thing, what a typical leftist beauracracy! overpaid, underworked, not efficient, and overpriced!

Gotta love the internet! thanks algore! "

" "It's an urban legend that tax cuts increase government revenues. " So when the IRS themselves reports increased revenues, that's an urban legend? "

" wcfreader,
"...regardless, you are also wrong for the fact that when rich get tax cuts, it doesn't go into savings. it goes into investments. rich people put their money to work...that's how many got to the point they are..." That is abundantly correct, unless taxes on earnings and gains are very high. That's how high taxes on earnings stifle the economy.


Cross: "..More can go back to the poor -- even to the point of having negative taxes. (That is, even if you paid no taxes because of low income, you still get a tax "refund.") Cross, if you want my money, come and get it. And if you want to give away whatever money you have, fine. But do you think it's ethical to push for government to do your stealing for you?

BTW, acheivers don't get money, we earn it. "

" 1. Laffer curve - debunked and disproved a long time ago. If the Laffer curve was accurate, Reagan should have had surpluses - and so should have Bush II.

2. Why is Clayson complaining - Congress hasn't raised any taxes recently? Everything should be hunky dory and the economy should be humming along. McSame, I mean McCain, should be 20 points ahead in the polls cause everything Bush did is perfect and who would want to change anything in this great economy we have right now.

3. I agree - why do we have to bail out everybody? Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac, those people should make it on their own! What's that you say - they are big corporations that we are bailing out with our tax dollars? And the Mortgage Protection Act of 2008 it does what? - "The bill allows businesses that lose money in 2008 and 2009 to get refunds of the taxes they paid over the past four years, rather than just the past two years, as is the case under current law. This provision, referred to as an extension of the net operating loss carryback, would cost an estimated $6.1 billion over the next ten years and is the single most costly provision in the bill." Oh - never mind.

Got to love hetfield - George Bush is the greatest - that's why we should keep going down this great path we are on.

Yep those lib's will screw everything up and we won't have it as great as it is now. Record deficits - stock market tanking - two wars costing us trillions - energy crisis looming - jobs being lost by the thousands daily - let's start up another chorus of "Happy Days Are Here Again". "

" Is it not interesting that the title for our Professor's Column which I am now looking at in the Sunday Waterloo Courier that was delivered to our home is "Tax Nonsense is Dangerous". I agree. Then if you look at the top of this blogging page the title to this article is "Dangerous Tax Nonsense". And again I would agree. "

" "xdfred wrote on Jul 14, 2008 11:12 AM:

Pursuit of happiness means you have to get off your duff and go after it."

You mean like how Paris Hilton does it? Or the hundreds of thousands of Baby Hueys who skated through an Ivy league college right into a chair on a board of directors. Now really, xdfred, did that person truly get off their duff and work for that? Doing bong hits in Beamers on dad's dime throughout college and graduating with D's but still getting a rosy gig at some East Coast based conglomerate. And then complaining the rest of their adult lives about those lazy bums on welfare. That's not anecdotal evidence, that's what happens. Those are the people you're defending like they're your family members.

Before you say "See, see, Chester has wealth envy! See, right there!", stop and think about it.
Your dutiful and consistent defense of very wealthy layabouts who wouldn't spit on you if your head was on fire is alarming to me.
Have these folks ever worked hard for their money? Ever done any kind of service for their country? And it offends you so much that some of US are opposed to them getting tax cuts from their wealthy fed allies. Why is that?
Seriously. "

" OMG Phil, run for the hills. The sky is falling! I bet that is your last thought, alone, at night, in the dark, as you drift off to nirvana.

earth is not falling into itself with a large sucking sound, phil. While some things really stink, and some things can be done better, the US congress isnt the answer to all things in life! People make their lives what they are, not some mystical overdressed elf who hands out prezzies once a year.

Americans should:

-make themselves responsible for their own education
-hold themselves accountable for their own actions
-earn their own way through the twists and turns of life
-honor life, including the unborn.
-serve their country honorably.
-speak english!

We dont need the libs in Washington, namely Californians, new yorkers and inner-city chicagoans, like Obama, to do these things for us.

Now, tell me how I am wrong, Phil. I cant wait. "

" And fred, I am a big proponent of tax breaks for small business owners and startups. There is a difference.
There is a difference between the creative minds and risk takers who accumulated wealth based on an idea and hard work and the kind of people's money the GOP staunchly defends today.
A big difference. "

" A comment on a tax matter which you have heard before from me, namely, it is my opinion that the stimulus package I received last week will be more effective that the one I received back early in the present administration which was merely an advance of tax rate reduction I would have received in the following year. I think you all know what I am trying to say.

Anyway I would like to remind you of an article that appeared in the U S News and World Report toward the end of the Reagan years. (I am not certain but it just could have been written by David Gergen.) Anyway, what it said was is that tax cuts can stimulate the economy up to a certain point until another tax cut would do no good.

Why? tax cuts do not add money into the available spending potential of those who pay no taxes and very little additional spending potential to those who pay a small amount of taxes. And those are the people who are forced to neglect health care, dental care, and car repairs, which finally means they become less productive at work and more absent from their work and a great drag to the profits of the nation.


Now apply this to our situation today. The tax stimulus package did give an additional amount of spending potential to a lot of people. A lot of the people will spend it on things they could not afford and many will spend it on things that are vital to their way of life and health and productivity.

And what did the rich do with their tax cuts of the of the early years of this century. Hopefully they created the jobs with wages of $20-30 an hour plus the benefits that promote physical wellness which cut down on medical neglect and unhealty living conditions and therefore medical costs to keep them alive and they regain a health they should not have lost to begin with.

While the administration did give us an advance on our tax cut back in 2001 or 2002, unfortunately the jobs which were created were in the $15 an hour and no benefits. And there is a rumor going around that soon most new jobs will be temporary jobs with temp wages and no benefits, jobs that are subject to outsourcing.

Also the benefits that temp services offer are not very often affordable to those who get temp wages and when they get to where they are eligible for an increase in wages, they are laid off only to be forced begin at the bottom of the scale once more. (Sometimes customer service people are rehired by the same temp service to a similar job in the very same company they worked before but in another company who has a sub contract. To be specific in a company like Electronic Data Services.

I hope the stimulus package will put more money into the necessary activities of the economy which will enhance the living of the people who get the $15 an hour wages with no benefits, and the number of those people is growing according to many reports. I suspect these reports are true because I have friends and relatives who are experiencing the very things that I have described.

The stimulus package is but another earned income credit don't you think? And isn't that O K when the CEO's are making 250+++times the amount that the employees of their company are receiving. As Warren Buffet said, The average CEO goes to the office, works for a day, and goes out of the building making more that day than the cleaning person he meets in the hall makes in a lifetime.

Once again the quote from back in the 50's or so by a retired supreme court justice. "You can have a democracy or you can have something else where the wealth and power is concentrated among
few but you can't have them both at the same time"

Conclusive Suggestion: The trickle up theory of wealth always works. The trickle down theory doesn't work very well. "

" I appreciate your comments Cross and Phil. I wish that everyone would understand them but some of the comments indicate that they are not understood. "

" By the numbers, Phil
1. Yes, if Congress, with presidential approval, didn't spend it all. If you spend more than you take in taxes, you have deficits. On the flip side, governments should have surpluses, either. But the Laffer curve is correct. Dropping taxes yields increased tax revenue. The curve says nothing about surpluses. Very deceitful of you to try and equate the two.

2. taxes will go up in 2010. Here it comes. And hidden taxes have gone up considerably. What do polls mean? According to polls, Kerry won by a landslide.

3. If government do gooders hadn't pushed the lenders to make risky loans in the name of fairness, I'd agree. But, as usual, government meddled. Barack Hussein Obama was actually involved in an organization pushing for more loans to those who couldn't pay them back.

I don't think anyone would say GWB is the greatest. His biggest problem was trying too hard to get along with Democrats, instead of showing them who the boss was. And allowing excessive spending.

Yep those lib's will screw everything up and we won't have it as great as it is now. Record deficits Thank you Congress- stock market tanking Thank you congress- two wars costing us trillions - Thank you Taliban energy crisis looming Thank you congress- jobs being lost by the thousands daily - Thank you congress for the punishing corporate tax laws we have in this country that drive business away. And who runs congress? "

" xdfred
wrote on Jul 15, 2008 10:24 AM:

.....What do polls mean? According to polls, Kerry won by a landslide.

You are so right xdfred. The exit polls that were taken according to Professor Freeman who graduated from the Massachuesetts Institute of Technology and now at the University of Pennyslavania has done a study on the "Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy".

a quote from the article : " discrepancies between the exit polls and the vote tally are an anomaly even if you examine just the battleground states of Pennsylvanania, Ohio and Kentucky. The likelihood that in Ohio Kerry's early exit polls would differ from the final vote tallies was less than one in 100; in Pennsylvania is slightly more than one in 100; and in Florida less that two in 100. ..........the odds against any two of these three combinations of votes occurring together are over 5,000 to one. and the odds against all three occuring are 662,000 to one." He concludes that "as much as we can say in social science that something is impossible, it is impossible that the descrepancies between predicted and actual vote counts in the three critical battlegroud states of the 2004 could have been due to chance or random error."

But the overwhelming number of states where the outcome for Kerry was below what the exit polls predicted indicate that there was not a random error. It almost approached unanimity, so much in fact, that the organization called US Count Votes conluded, "In fact the burden of proof should be to show that the election process is accurate and fair."

my comments: unfortunately I am not able to come up with any reason for such discrepany. I am not able to say that there was cheating. Do I believe that there was cheating? Yes I do. Would it have swung the election to Kerry if there was not any cheating. I don't know. And it does not answer puzzling main question which was the heading of the London newspaper, "How could 60,639,281 people be so dumb?" including 751,957 people in Iowa. "

" xdfred
wrote on Jul 15, 2008 10:24 AM:

"I don't think anyone would say GWB is the greatest. His biggest problem was trying too hard to get along with Democrats, instead of showing them who the boss was. And allowing excessive spending."


xdfred, I must say you have a wierd sense of humor. "

" Of course - I should have known - its Congress fault! And now that the Democrats have had majorities in Congress for a whole year and a half - they caused all this. Right! They and the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny got together....

Let's see - who has run Congress most of Bush's term?

Let's see - who, after threatening to get rid of the filibuster, now uses it to stop EVERYTHING that Bush would have to veto because it would make them look even more greedy and uncaring?

Answer: Republicans

Final question - who could have vetoed as many bills as he wanted over the past 7+ years to control spending?

Answer: The Brilliant Conservative - Bush

hetfield - for millions of Americans right now the sky is falling - no health care, losing their home, their job, can't afford to make ends meet due to energy and food costs. You are living in a dream world if you don't recognize that.

And the Laffer curve has been discredited - even Reagan's bugdet person - David Stockman - admitted cutting taxes will reduce government revenues. Repeating something doesn't make it true - it just makes it annoying to listen to. "

" spin, spin, spin..

explain to me two things...

1) why the rich shouldn't receive tax cuts equal to other brackets (percentage wise)?

2) why people should be taxed on their income, not at the same rate?

I'm not advocating for the bill gates, the movie stars making 25 plus million dollars a year. i'm talking about a hard working familys in the 2nd-4th income tax brackets...

bottom line is, income taxes shouldn't be a way to bring people's take home incomes closer to equal....they are different for a reason, they earned their money, it shouldn't be redistributed because someone else 'deserves' it, and that is exactly what the dems and their potential leader obama want.

and thats exactly why the market isn't going to get better any time soon....it the the fear that obama has won the election. "

" "A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues."

– John F. Kennedy, Sept. 18, 1963, radio and television address to the nation on tax-reduction bill
--War Hero & proponent of lower taxes. "

" Another week, another beat down of Cross by the good Professor.

Classic! "

" Phil: Looking greedy and uncaring must be terrible.

The only thing you've ever gotton right, and you messed it up with "brilliant conservative". "Final question - who could have vetoed as many bills as he wanted over the past 7+ years to control spending?

Answer: The Brilliant Conservative -
Bush"

And Democrats enjoyed more control during the first 7 years than you care to own up to.

To all Barack Hussein Obama worshippers out here, please remember one thing, just like the duty of a corporation is to make a profit, the motive of the politician is to get elected and re-elected, not solve yoyr problems. In fact, if politicians actually solved problems, or quit creating them, they would work themselves out of a job. Just like the U.N. Look at our present tax code? It is designed to force people to seek special favor, keeping politicians employed. "

" hetfield - for millions of Americans right now the sky is falling - no health care, losing their home, their job, can't afford to make ends meet due to energy and food costs. You are living in a dream world if you don't recognize that.

What millions of Americans have no health care? This isn't the former Soviet Union or Cuba. Every American has health care.

People have lost homes and jobs for decades. The reasons are varied. What is your point? That BHO will magically stop that from ever happening again?

High energy and food costs? Thank you tree huggers. "

" Some call Barack Obama names. Some use all three names. My mother never called me by my three names but my cousins did because in their home it was a custom. I didn't like it.

In some homes a mother calls her children by three names when she is indignant and has a message of rebuke.

xdfred!! I wish you would quit reminding us that you hate Obama by using his middle name. I know that this would be his preference and I respect his greatly. In spite of the unkind remarks that have been made on this postboard, it is my opinion that he has integrity and civility that is coming back into style in this election. It has a long way to go.

And it has a long way to go on this bloggers posting board. If we can't agree we can at least resist the temptation to be disrespectful and disagreeable. "

" xdfred @ Jul 15, 2008 2:25 PM said, "Every American has health care."

xdfred, I suspect that you're smoking something mighty powerful. There are 46 million Americans without health insurance.

See: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/08/30/health/webmd/main806291.shtml "

" From the brilliant Jeroze: xdfred!! I wish you would quit reminding us that you hate Obama by using his middle name.

Wow. Using a person's middle name equals hate now. It must be nice to be able to write rules, to dictate. That must by why left wingers love dictators. And to read minds. Tell me, who else do I hate, since you progressive types are so all knowing.

And keep wishing.

....it is my opinion that he has integrity and civility that is coming back into style in this election.... His present and former associates show that quite clearly. And as to style? Jesse Jackson threatening to pull a Bobbit on him is style. Definately.

"In some homes a mother calls her children by three names when she is indignant and has a message of rebuke." Master of the obvious if there ever was one. But they only do that when actually speaking to the children in question, Jeroze Middlename Lastname, so how does your brilliant, progressive, caring, observation apply here? "

" when did health care become synonomis with health insurance? "

" jeroze @ Jul 15, 2008 2:49 PM asked xdfred to stop the regular use of Obama's middle name.

xdfred @ Jul 15, 2008 3:07 PM basically said to jeroze, "Don't hold your breath."

"jeroze" I asked xdfred the same thing several months back and got the same answer. I wouldn't worry about it too much. xdfred's refusal tells everyone much more about him than it does about Obama or anyone else. "

" To those who pointed out that we have progressive tax rates so there's noting unfair about a flat percentage reduction.

The problem with that is that the tax rates are progressive for a reason. The reason is to tax at a heavier rate those who can pay that heavier rate. (True, the top rate now is only 35% when, at one time, it was 90% but the principle of progressive rates is still there.)

The problem is that if one takes off taxes on the basis of a flat percentage of all brackets, then you are frustrating the principle of progressive rates. To be consistent, one must be more generous to those with lower incomes than those with larger incomes.

The claim that it's "only fair" to apply the same reduction to everyone is bad logic.

And the idea of a flat tax is just to make the poor and the middle class pay for the government while the rich skate. "

" "xdfred, I suspect that you're smoking something mighty powerful. There are 46 million Americans without health insurance"


OK, oh myopic one, but that's not what Phillippe said. He said "without health care", you know, purposely making things look worse than they are. Intend to deceive. That sort of thing. There are also millions without Mercedes, and millions without mansions. And without Sam's club memberships. The point is???????? "

" Let there be peace on earth and let it begin right on this website. "

" Phil and Cross, you libs really are all doom and gloom. millions of american think the sky is falling because they dont think for themselves and have chosen not to help themselves.

it's time for your party, your religion so to speak, and your demigods to get off their rears and make do for themselves. you want to groom entire generations of americans who cant help themselves.

if the sky is falling, they should have built a strong roof to hide under.

sheesh. stop relying on handouts and do something!!!

get a job, get training, go to school, learn, invest, earn.

The donkeyes are the party of laziness, do nothing and dont help themselves. the question is really, why?

I know that your hope for barack hussein obama to be your great multicolored hope is just a fairy tale.

I really feel sorry for the left at this point. thanks fellas.

Vote conservative this fall if you want the best for the country, not the worst of life! "

" "And Democrats enjoyed more control during the first 7 years than you care to own up to."

xdfred - please explain that one - the Dems weren't allowed to submit amendments to bills, they weren't included in the meetings to draft bills, they were basically shut out of the process. Talk about things you know about, don't just make things up.

"People have lost homes and jobs for decades. The reasons are varied. What is your point?" - The point is that they are losing them are record rates and what do Bush and the Repubs focus on - bailing out the mortgage companies. The point is times are tough and the idiot stands up at a press conference and says the economy is strong. And then says any problems that exist are the Democrats fault. He isn't even a good liar - but he is a liar.

It just drives you crazy to have to admit that the Republicans caused these problems, and their policies are wrong and a failure. Just like the kid who blames everyone else when his report card has all D's and F's.

Sure its the tree huggers fault - what new environmental legislation has been passed since 2000? None - companies have been working with these laws in place for years. No, the policies are failures and the Republicans aren't "man enough" to admit their own failure.

And this is the "grown up" party? It's the party of finger pointers and spoiled rich brats. "

" Cross, my neice and her daughter have no health insurance but do have good health care. My son has no health insurance but does get good health care. You libs keep trying to equate no health insurance to no health care, and it aint so. "

" "hetfield wrote on Jul 15, 2008 6:53 PM:

sheesh. stop relying on handouts and do something!!!
get a job, get training, go to school, learn, invest, earn."

Really, hetfield? Is that the answer? From recent posts by you and your friends here after getting that job, any demand for better wages, enhanced health insurance, improved conditions, virtually anything except full submission to the company is liberal whining and crying. Right?

I'd actually be fully inclined to think that you and your buddies are more likely to crap on worker's rights, side dutifully with the employer in 99% of cases, and anything that doesn't keep their employees' mouths shut and their benefits stagnant is communism.

I'm gonna make a leap here, since by way of this tax discussion we're basically discussing quality of life issues and the widening gap between the Hiltonites you wave your pom-poms for and the working class.
You're anti-abortion, right Hetfield? You and Xdfred, and Coalplant and all you tuff rightwingers who hold that symbolic compassion for the "most vulnerable among us". And by the way, if the right wing brethren you idolize raised those aborted children to happy, healthy adults I wouldn't be able to agree more with your thought process.

But here's what all the (extremely repetitive and unoriginal) slop you shovel leads me to assume:

Shortly after leaving the womb that child needs to get a job...wait, not get a job, but start a company. Because workers, 160 million of them nationwide, simply "whine" and "cry" if they ever dare demand their employers stop shipping their jobs overseas, supply reasonable health coverage based on profit margins of said employer, or ask to be paid more than a probable $5.00/hr wage set by national companies in a certain industry, for standing on their feet 8 hours a day. And dang they're anti-Americans if they ask their government to step in and put some restrictions on letting these practices go completely wild!

And so we don't want this baby whining and crying about worker's rights or starting a Communist labor union. He SIMPLY needs to bypass working for someone else or have "asked for it" if he's laid off or stuck with a low yearly maximum on his health plan coverage.
Now, provided our little guy was able to shake off the crime infested neighborhood and abject peer pressure and not make any dumb mistakes during adolescence, seeing as how he's such a balanced youngster with a single mother who was influenced into bringing him into Hetfield's unchecked capitalistic paradise, he figures to start that business he may need at least some remedial training.
Assuming his 18 year old mom, whose baby daddy split, doesn't have a college fund stocked up for the little tyke perhaps he could get a Pell Grant for...forget that, says Hetfield. That's socialism! I'd rather my tax dollars go to a poorly planned, losing war or into construction on the byway connecting Denny Hastert's investment properties. I'd rather whine and stomp my feet about whining and foot stomping liberals asking for handouts, totally pretending that my contributions aren't just welfare for a flagrantly overspending GOP Congress since their approving buddy Bush took office.
So, the young toddler gets himself a student loan and racks up $15K in debt at a state school as tuition fees and books go up a couple percent every year.
But during Sophmore year, just before finals, his roommate and he get popped with a bag of weed in their dorm. Where was big, stoic Hetfield to nurture the young man and steer him away from life's vices? Probably on a message board somewhere whining about other people whining about stuff.
The cops are called and now junior has a controlled substance charge on his record and guess what? No more student loans.
So our little abortion survivor leaves school and fortunately lands a job at a meatpacking plant where he starts at a robust $9 an hour and a less than stellar HMO plan making strategic cuts in cattle carcasses 10 hours a day, on his feet. I guess, regardless of the contempt that Mr. Know It All Hetfield has for working Americans, our brave sport ain't hearing it since he has to pay rent and rising energy bills and figures he probably oughta earn a paycheck.
Two years in, little man is really taking his work seriously and preparing to apply for what's perceived to be a recently opened supervisor slot. Our guy soon finds out why that void existed. The corporate office in Dallas of the meatpacking plant tiger works at in Iowa has deemed it necessary, even with 5 years of windfall profits, to send 3 of their factories to Guatemala.
Those profits certainly reach shareholders but you can bet your hindquarters that a higher percentage is going to reach a stratospheric group of people who laugh all the way to the bank that tools like Hetfield continue to defend them from increased government taxation. Are these captains of industry? Pioneers? Not likely. They're beneficiaries of passed down fortunes made on very, very lax corporate regulation for years.

Hetfield will come back and say that in a free job market Baby buddy oughta be able to quickly find another job and if an employer is doing this kind of thing to their employees then the market should work itself out and force that company to stop paying low wages and outsource jobs. Hetfield will continue to be completely obtuse and refuse to acknowledge that corporations are better at this kind of thing than average workers, and even unions,and also tend to have a regional legislator on the payroll who pulls favors in Washington. And that legislator more often than not is a Republican. A Republican of the very government that Hetfield tells us we need less of. Or maybe Hetfield and his buddies Coalplant and Xdfred don't know any of this because Foxnews tells him that we're suckling the teat of George Soros and you can just forget him getting his news from any source other than those with right wing slants to reinforce their narrow belief systems. And Hetfield can go ahead and get out of my face.

Is this all hyperbole, Hetfield? Tell us that Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim 65 more times and we'll talk about what's pathetic exaggeration, hombre.

Hetfield also wrote:
"I really feel sorry for the left at this point. thanks fellas."
.......why? Seriously..why? Because they're going to win in November?
You truly must live in bizarro world. "

" " "And Democrats enjoyed more control during the first 7 years than you care to own up to."

Right...isn't the GOP the party of James Sensenbrenner, who turned off the lights and ran off with his gavel during a House Judiciary Committee meeting about the Patriot Act because Democrats would've liked to have an opinion on such a critical federal policy?

Wasn't it the GOP that would have Senate subcommittee meetings and not tell Democrats where they were?

The same Congress who rubber stamped everything W. sent over?

Right, the Democrats had all kinds of control, xdfred. Try to be more honest. "

" Chester I love it,,,, Judging from your last post the way you see the typical liberal is as a pot smoker, should have been aborted, unemployed or underemployed, teat suckler, who lost his chance to succede due to their own failures. I think our work with you is done as you have seen the light at what a wholly unproductive and destructive philosphy and lifestyle choice liberalism is.

Obama in 08
Apparently he's a muslim, Chester said something about it "

" No, the point I'm making there is that life is not as simple for everyone to just grab a few of daddy's dollars and coast through college on D's right into a cozy managerial role.
If you got me figured out now, I done figured you out a long time ago. Apparently Nicole Ritchie is your hero because that's who (people) like yourself invariably defend.
What does it tell you that college grads, $40k in debt, are fighting for $12 an hour jobs, and those wages oftentimes won't exceed $15? Or do you just ignore that and continue your mindboggling support for trust fund babies?
What the rising unemployment rate and garbage private sector jobs available tells me is that NAFTA and globalization, and corporate welfare and laissez faire policies from GOP bums you wave your pom-poms and do cartwheels for have had a crucial impact on our economy and quality of life.
Don't pretend you know what you're talking about, Coalplant. Repeat your catchphrases with every post and continue to be ill-informed.
We're George Soros followers? Practically everything that comes out of your mouth is straight from the mind of squarehead Sean Hannity.

You're not good at this. "

" I appreciate the comments by,
chester on Jul 16, 2008 12:47 AM:

That is not just a whining liberal rant....which has become Limbaughism, that is usually a strawperson that came from his fantancy world.

Now let us get down to the present. Does not the same kind of thing happen when a family that is on the way to the American dream, and then a 500 year flood comes. I think if you would go to Cedar Rapids, Iowa city, Lamont, if would not be surprising to find a sizeable number who at whatever age they may be will have a gigantic challenge to rise above the rubble and stench that surrounds their former home. Are they the liberal whiners that some of our blogging friends are talking about. Or are they talking about the people on disability, some of whom became disabled by disease including cancer or by injury at a plant where safety conditions were not present, or just because of something that is a tragedy.

As I write, a certain mother whose husband will be released from prison this year for drug charges after a 10 year sentence has borrowed a car from a citizen who has liberal compassion. She and her working son are going to Tennessee to pick up the twins who went there to visit their grandparents. This woman has a car with a failing transmission and a squealing front wheel bearing to get her six miles to work at a Casey's where she has an income of $18,000 a year, and also a part time waitress job which gets her about $5,000 a year. Her earned income credit is about $4,500 a year. Fortunately she has no rent to pay but the utilities in this home and the repair of appliances etc. keep her behind all the time. That oldest son has finished a two year stint at Hawkeye Tech and now is a night time security guard at the Casino in Wtloo. Do you see the pattern.

For a number of years her earned income credit went to pay off the debt she accumulated going to rehabilitation from the drug problem she had and the education loans that still haunt her. And she works her heart out to support her twins (now 14 years old)

I am thankful for a few of those people characterized on this blog as "whining liberals" who have given her appliances, loaned her their vehicles for her to travel 300 miles to see her husband in prison, and to get her children in Tennesee when they go to visit their grandparents who live there.

I also admire the mother who deserves a lot more tips than she receives at the restaurant. Is she perfect, no. Did she make mistakes? plenty. Is she a decent citizen? I would say she is sort of heroine in my opinion. I wish that some of the bloggers who talk about whiners could meet her. She does not make a habit of whining though she has plenty to whine about. Like working for a grumpy restaurant owner and an unkind manager at the quick mart.....enough said.

And thanks again chester for the description of what must happen often. "

" Apparantly Chester is ranting because he/she likes having handouts provided to all by the good ol buddy government. Chester disregards conservatives for thinking that hard work is the american way, that not wanting to kill the unborn is boorish.

He/she goes into so many little rants about the right, conservatives and America that it is clear it wants to become a socialist country.

Chester is pouting because he/she cant stand the truth about good americans; we want to work hard and succeed. Poor mr union man, get everything they ever wanted for doing little.

Chester claims I have said Barack Hussein Obama is a muslim. I have never said that once. I do know the facts. he was given this name by his muslim father, then grew up in muslim Jakarta, before his dad dumped him for who knows what.

Poor Chester. Sounds like life is getting you down. I know the scenario you played out on little chester leaving his poor mommy to earn entitlements is your little nirvana, but it wont cut it in the real world Chester and Chester11.

You are the one in the bizarro world. You just cant stand it and refuse to follow the light.

Cheers, and have a nice day. I'm sure the 3rd is coming soon for payday. "

" coalplant
wrote on Jul 16, 2008 6:04 AM:

Obama in 08
Apparently he's a muslim, Chester said something about it "

I heard that about 12% of the American people believe that Barack is a Muslim. On the other hand I received a report last month that Barack is a Christian who memorized the Bible because it is his favorite book and that he believes Jesus was an American Patriot. "

" hetfield @ Jul 16, 2008 11:57 AM said, "Chester claims I have said Barack Hussein Obama is a muslim. I have never said that once. I do know the facts. he was given this name by his muslim father, then grew up in muslim Jakarta, before his dad dumped him for who knows what."

hetfield, we all know what you have and haven't said. We also know why you keep saying "Hussein" at every opportunity and why you are now referring to his "Muslim" father and "Muslim" Jakarta. You're trying to make people think that Obama is a Muslim or Muslim influenced in the hope that they will panic and vote against him. (And we all know that your intent is to hope that people will connect "Muslim" = "terrorist" in their minds.)

Just because it's "politics" to run for office does NOT mean that anything goes. What you are trying to do here is morally reprehensible.

Fortunately, I'm confident that despite people like you and your efforts, that Obama is going to be elected president anyway. "

" jeroze wrote on Jul 16, 2008 12:58 PM: "I heard that about 12% of the American people believe that Barack is a Muslim. On the other hand I received a report last month that Barack is a Christian who memorized the Bible because it is his favorite book and that he believes Jesus was an American Patriot. "

So many things wrong with this I don't know where to begin. You "received a report" from WHOM? And he MEMORIZED the Bible? Uh huh. Jesus was an AMERICAN patriot? Good grief, don't know where to begin. "

" To All Libbies on this board (or others who read eclectically):

I have a book to recommend to you. It's "The Age of Anxiety" by Haynes Johnson (Harcourt: 2005)

The theme of the book is to show that McCarthyism of the 1940s and 1950s and modern hard-right conservatism are really the same thing. He reviews the history of the McCarthy era and the history of the hard right during the last eight years. He finds that their tactics are the same.

He also finds that the currant McCarthyism without McCarty is far more dangerous. That's because while the current movement lacks a McCarthy, this time it is government policy from the president on down.

What makes it the same is that McCarthy sold fear of foreign and domestic Communists while the current hard-right is selling fear of foreign and domestic Moslem's and forever linking them with "terrorism."

One of the similarities in tactics that Johnson points out is that the hard-right, just as McCarty did, have their own facts and nothing will disabuse them of the fact that they are just wrong.

I'd recommend it. "

" kramerica:

The report which I received also had the bit about how Barack always wears his flag lapel pin even in the shower.

Barack and Michelle go to bed and recite the pledge to the flag until they fall asleep.

Barack's private jet has a work space, an exercising room and a mega church.

There is a tape existing of Michelle reciting the Declaration of Independence the text of which Barack has had tatooed on his stomach upside down so he can read it as he does sit ups.

There is more but I'm sure most of the bloggers have seen it. "

" Cross

You read books that echo some of the things I find fits right in with some of the things that I have read and have believed.

Also, I remember the McCarty era and how everyone feared Communism...was not the Vietnam war an effort to stop the spread of Communism that was going to swallow up the planet in a domino effect. The World Council of Churches and the National Council of Churches were being infiltrated by Communists with Billy James Hargis and other the radio evangelists preaching and propheting and profiting on literature against the National Council until......the NCC came to the defence of Hargis against the FCC over an attempt to deny Hargis tax-exempt status for being too politcal.....what a boormerang and after that Hargis sort of faded away and so did the rest of the echos of Hargis.

And what really should we have been fearing??? And what should we fear now???? In September and October 2001 I said to one of my friends, this guy scares me!!! i.e. "W" An angry person who is filled with fear doesn't make good decisions. Right???? And now I get the feeling that paralysis and desparation is setting into the present Administration....Is that a thing to fear also????We haven't had this much to fear for a long time.... "

" jeroze on your Jul 16, 2008 2:38 PM post, I love it. "

" Cross writes 'What you are trying to do here is morally reprehensible'

How can this be? From a member of the movement that claims no morality it is ironic of you to say that I too dont have morals, or at least are within reproach.

I was merely responding to another liberal lie from those bloggers accusing me of calling Barack Hussein Obama a Muslim. I only stated the facts; fact, his dad named him. fact, his dad was a muslim. fact, his dad moved him to Jakarta which is overwhelmingly Muslim. fact, Jakarta is a Taliban save-haven and training ground. fact, his dad abandoned him and his family there.

I have also never referred to muslims as terrorists. I refered to terrorists, who may or not be muslim, be tracked down and exterminated.

Cross, MrT, TB and others seem to be the ones associating Hussein=muslim=terrorists not myself.

Why cant the followers of Barack Hussein Obama simply take his name for what it is? Barack himself doesnt shy away from his name, and I'm sure he doesnt need you fighting his battles.

I will admit that I have seen liberals respond to his name much more than to his lack of experience and liberal only record. Also, to his never ending flipflopping and his promise of change? There has been no printed outlines of his change plans, only flowery words. "

" hetfield @ Jul 16, 2008 5:16 PM maintains his sanctimonious pronouncement that he has "only stated the facts."

Oh, come on hetfield, none of us were born yesterday. You are doing your best to imply to folks that Obama is a Muslim/terrorist. And, doing something as grave as that about a presidential candidate is what I find morally reprehensible. (There are something like 12% who think Obama is a Muslim now and you'r trying to add to that number.) "

" Barack Hussein Obama, to my knowledge, is neither a Muslim nor a terrorist. He has a Muslim name and has friends who are terrorists(Ayers.)

I hope this puts that claim to rest, Cross.

On other news of the day; I see the presumptive democratic candidate is losing support everywhere! Left-wingers are mad because he flip-flops to the center on alot of issues(faith-based, partial births, etc.) Centerists are angry because he tells them one thing, then is quoted telling leftys that that is not what he meant(to pull out of Iraq or not...hmmm), and now some super-delegates are rethinking their support. Do NOT count Billary out of this nomination yet. "

" hetfield wrote on Jul 16, 2008 11:57 AM:
a laughably asinine, fumbling attempt at insulting me.

Haha! Come on dude. That was so weak.

Against my better judgment I'll address you now adult to adult:
Those in power who share your GOP ideology are making this economic crisis worse.
Thing is, it hasn't been felt as acutely in Iowa as it has in places like Denver, Co., Michigan, several major cities in California and Arizona, up and down the Eastern seaboard. Houses in Cally and and the Sun Belt are selling for 40% of their liens. The PRINCIPAL on their liens.
But it is coming to Iowa. You better believe it. And you're sitting there thinking this is what we libs want. A miserable country, a miserable world where we get to say "I told you so". And you're wrong. I am concerned.
We have a federal government run by stubborn jackasses that hold tight to their polarized ideals relative to leaving everything to the markets. That's not going to fix this.
Bush's stimulus helped delay it a little.
What is needed though is a shared public/private ownership of assets and liabilities in much of the nation's finances.
I'm sorry if you think that's socialism, Ayn. FDR is hailed as a hero because he actually stepped up to the plate and did something. Hoover, by contrast, is considered a poor president. But Bush makes Hoover look like a god.
Sometimes, Hetfield, the government HAS TO GET INVOLVED.
We're getting past the point of just telling people to work hard and be successful. This economy is creeping death and we're gonna feel the sting big time in a year if the executive and legislative branches don't shed their radical idealism, on both sides, and blend some approaches here.

I know this is too much for you. In your mind, it's all whining and communism and Husseins and lapel pins. You assume your presence here and your flimsy posts are changing minds or at the very least, somehow charming to your friends.
But you are monumentally uninformed, Hetfield. Turn off Foxnews for awhile and get it together man. "

" For the record, I do apologize for the Chester/Chester11 thing. I don't know why it does that. "

" Hmm!! Hetfield, I would expect Rush Limbaugh to agree with you. I really have not seen any other evidence of what you are describing in the claim that Obama is loosing support. I think Hillary would be a terrible mistake at this juncture. There is no talk of any Iowa superdelegates changing that I know of. "

" Another brilliant neocon mind. Trent Lott, today:

"We didn’t have one drop of oil spilt when we had the biggest hurricane in recent history, Hurricane Katrina."

Ok, Trent. "

" Ask McCain (or his defenders) how he can claim to be anti-abortion yet support stem cell research. Just where do you think these stem cells come from? He has lied and flip-flopped all over himself and our country. In fact there's plenty of video out there to show he tells the same lies his buddy W told. He's a liar and a snake in the grass. He tells whatever group he's speaking to what he thinks they want to hear and then runs his phony ads purporting that he doesn't always say what we want to hear but tells what we need to hear. Excuse me, but I don't need him telling what I need to hear. I certainly don't need to hear anymore of his warmonging messages and just saying he has what we "need" to hear is reminiscent of 1933 Germany and the angry candidate there. "

" Well here comes another round of fear mongering from the libs, lets do a little round up on the propaganda:

50674
Mccain message = Nazi Germany

Cross

Muslim = Terrorist

Chester

Economy = Worse then the depression and coming soon to your home state. Only communism or some type of socialism will solve the problem. Our current form of government is apparently useless

Paris Hilton and other baby hueys = Ruining our country with her families money

Cross

McCarthyism = Our current government

Phil

Health insurance = people being denied care all over America

Chester

FDR hero = Tell that to the American citizens he locked up to supposedly protect America from Japan.

Abortion = Good for the economy

Jeroze

W = angry person

frankly don't know how you all sleep at night knowing all the bad stuff going on and knowing how powerless you are

Obama in 08
Jeroze says he is a Christian,, Phil isn't gonna like him calling him names and chester is gonna flip out over the private jet. Lets hope Obama doesn't give Paris a ride on it "

" Coaplant:

"FDR hero = Tell that to the American citizens he locked up to supposedly protect America from Japan. "

AHAHAHAAA!! Come on. Is that really what your neoconservative mind thinks? I love when cons get cornered or find that rare opportunity to go against their own thinking and call a liberal a racist or say that the Iraq War was about freeing a country of oppressed people. As if that's really something they cared about at any time throughout the whole debacle.
On the Japanese internment camps then. It's my unshakeable opinion that guys like you would've looked on Japanese Americans, all of them, in the same way guys like you look at all Muslims today. But let me get this straight and give you a chance to explain.
Scooping up Muslims based on some other Muslim fingering them with no evidence (perhaps because of some beef they had) and letting them go 5 years later with no charges mainly because of their names and some ambiguous reason..what's that Coalplant? Is that ok, because it's happening now under Bush and some teat suckling lib like me insulting your idol President demands that you defend this practice?
I'll eagerly await your backpedaling answer.
Explain to me how this is different than what happened in WWII.

Also, am I defending FDR for that. Not really. But it was a different time and most of us have become more enlightened since then. But I'd like to hear your answer about Muslims today.

I'll get back to you on the economy...I have to pick up my free cheese and butter this morning before scoring another vial of crack. "

" coalplant: in response to sleeping at night, the secret is

1. Trust in a God who is Sovereign

2. Hope for a government to change its corruption.

3. Put most of your new investments in TIPS i. e, Treasury Inflation Protected Securities.

If you cannot meet the minimum requirements of individual purchase use a mutual fund such as T Rowe Price Treasury Inflation Securities which has a minimum purchase of $2,500 and additional purchases of $100 increments. This year the return so far is about 7% and growing.

4. Work for Peace and Protest deficit spending.

Sleep well, my friend. "

" cross1242
wrote on Jul 15, 2008 3:42 PM:

"jeroze" I asked xdfred the same thing several months back and got the same answer. I wouldn't worry about it too much. xdfred's refusal tells everyone much more about him than it does about Obama or anyone else. "

Yes, it "tells" that I don't kowtow to leftwing wishes and the desire to hide someones shady past from the spotlight. In other words, you two characters don't get to dictate what I can and can't write, censorship seekers. "

" Jeroze, save your sob stories. I have very personal reasons for despising drug dealers. If we, as a nation, decided to execute anyone who sold a joint or more, I'd volunteer to be the hangman. And if we did that, our drug problem all but disappears. Not go after users. Dealers. "

" 50674
wrote on Jul 16, 2008 11:59 PM:

" Ask McCain (or his defenders) how he can claim to be anti-abortion yet support stem cell research. Just where do you think these stem cells come from? He has lied and flip-flopped all over himself and our country. In fact there's plenty of video out there to show he tells the same lies his buddy W told. He's a liar and a snake in the grass. He tells whatever group he's speaking to what he thinks they want to hear and then runs his phony ads purporting that he doesn't always say what we want to hear but tells what we need to hear. Excuse me, but I don't need him telling what I need to hear. I certainly don't need to hear anymore of his warmonging messages and just saying he has what we "need" to hear is reminiscent of 1933 Germany and the angry candidate there. "


wow, a little anger issue 50674? You can insert Barack Hussein Obama in this same statement as this guy is the messiah of flip-flopping.

I've stated many times, McCain is not my favorite character either. On way too many issues he leans too left. Beleive me, not a good thing(just look how angry you are.)

However, of the two(or three, dont count out billary) candidates left, McCain is by far the most qualified, experienced, honorable, and deserving. BHO shouldnt even be in the same class as this McCain. In fact, if it werent for the 'wink-wink' type of politics in Chi-town, he wouldnt be.

BTW, 50674, where exactly do you stand on issues? From smoking ban statements you have made, you hate loosing your rights(something the left enjoys to do.) But then you turn around and support BHO and the liberals? You love the democratic congress(even thought they voted for war in Iraq) but the congress has poll ratings well below the President. And you want more libs in office?

This is a huge problem, those that want things both ways. I can honestly say their is not a conservative viewpoint that I disagree with. This is not to say I am a republican, as I am not.

Vote No to socialism this Fall! "

" And your point, coalplant? Only YOUR opinion is of any importance? Write your own column. Not seeing a whole lot of wisdom from you, either.You know what they say about opinions they are like (expletive deleted) everyone has one...yours seems extraordinarily large. I don't agree with yours you don't agree with mine. Big deal. "

" Xdfred: I respect your personal reasons for despising drug dealers. I despise them too.

On the other hand I greatly respect EX-Drug Dealers and EX-drug addicts.

The sob story part of it that bothers me is takes a life time and maybe more to convince the incompassionate conservatives to change their minds about a person who has returned to a productive and worthwhile living. Is it any wonder most people who are drug dealers and drug addicted can't make the change???? "

" Excellent advice Jeroze,,, seems the economy is treating you well despite the doom and gloom and fear mongering coming from others "

" Geez, Chester thats all you got,,, I think your lying about getting some crack as it appears you have already sampled some today.

FDR = Bush in your mind it appears

Obama in 08
Please or Chester will implode even worse then he already is "

" Oh yes, I told the sob story on JULY 16, 9:22 A M to illustrate:

1. How bad behaviour has bad consequences and including how hard it sometimes is to become good and productive once more

2. to emphasize that those some so-called "whining liberals" are really liberals with liberal compassion and have the joy of knowing that with their help the despised drug people and the others in the bad crowd can become patriotic citizens once again.

And I will live up to the name which some give me ("whining liberal)by whining about those who are only interested in punishing the bad crowd and longing to be their executioner. "

" 50674,

Right on man,,,no big deal at all,,, just appears you taking the time to reply is a deal in and of its self.

No harm man just love it when the Nazi references start flying. Have you noticed that Chester is almost starting to make sense in crack head, sort of way. and apparently he buys crack from what he said in his last post

Obama in 08
He's a unifier, as he has made me and Jesse Jackson agree on a few things "

" Trent Lotts remark on no oil spilled in Katrina makes me wonder about what I saw visiting the gulf in 2002 in the E.Cote and W. Cote Bay area. My memory is the impression that the words of America the Beautiful stanza 1, should end from "sea to slimy sea". "

" hetfield @ Jul 17, 2008 10:45 AM said, "Vote No to socialism this Fall!"

hetfield, you clearly have no idea what "socialism" is. You're another one of the hard-right believers that:

progressives = liberals = Democrats = socialists = communists = totalitarians = anybody that's different from me


That belief is just so mindless. The fact that you can't make distinctions in political beliefs is just one reason to disqualify your opinions. "

" I can make a better comp line for ya Cross.

Socialists-libbies-dems-stoners-centralists-independents-conservatives-the good guys.

Stop skewing the numbers left, Cross! "

" well let's see hetfield, I do hate losing my "rights' but I still didn't smoke in public places, even when it was legal. I own firearms and believe me, I ALWAYS will. I hate war, I want our men and women out of there as much as Iraq wants us out. I put myself in the shoes of their civilians and you know, I think I probably would shoot at some armed troop who invaded my country just like they are doing. I am not a democrat I am not a republican. I did vote for Grassley ...he has some positive attributes I admire. I detest McCain and his entire mindset. I do not particularly care for Obama and have said many times I will vote against NcCain and most likely write in my choice. To many, that's wasted vote ....to me it's my right. I'm not naive ...government follows it's own whims, most likely financed by their special-interest groups but that doesn't stop me from writing, calling and emailing MY elected representatives on each and every issue that I am passionate about. I care deeply about prison reform, right to bear arms, maintaining Medicare payments to our docotrs and hospitals so our elderly can continue to receive healthcare, and though I wish life weren't such that women abort babies I will still be for their legal right to do so because I'm old enough to remember the "old days" of back-street butchers and know that is what will return. I know that because whether abortion is legal or illegal women have been having them for ceturies and it's not going to change. I think the government regulates where it doesn't need to and doesn't regulate where it should. I'm like every other American ....where and what are MY opinions ....and yes, I still do have the freedom to express my opinion and will continue to do so. I strike by when I perceive threat (read attacked on web boards) but am basically a non-aggressive, nonviolent person who, if I were walking out among any of you, not one thing would distinguish me from any other average American. And that hetfield, is about as much about me as you need to know. "

" 50674 which I expected has something to do with Sumner, in 1980 John B. Anderson got my vote. In 1984, 1988, 1992,and 1996 my vote was a write in for Jim Leach. I would recommend him to you for 2008.

I almost got a chance to move to Sumner once but ended up in Guttenberg 1988-1992 my spouse went to a school in Dubuque to get her Masters Degree. "

" From ABC News (you know, that obvious outlet of liberal bias):

"Presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain, has attended even fewer Afghanistan-related Senate hearings over the past two years than Obama’s one. ...McCain, R-Ariz., the top Republican on the Senate Armed Service Committee, has attended zero of his committee’s six hearings on Afghanistan over the last two years. "

Zero.
Ignore this conservatives, like you do everything else that doesn't come carte blanche from Foxnews or Rush Limbaugh. "

" Xdfred:
The death sentence for a guy that sells a joint?
Did I understand that correctly? I just want to make sure I didn't misinterpret and then I'm at fault later for noting what you're proposing there. Please advise me if I may have misunderstood your statements above. Because as of now I'm understanding that you are asserting that in America, the land of the free, the home of the brave, we should put to death people that sell as small an amount of weed as a joint.
Do you understand why you are ridiculed and not taken seriously? Us libs and our RADICAL ideas about redistribution of wealth and our wacky environmental concerns!
Because guys like xdfred are such balanced, healthy individuals.
The death sentence...

How old is the planet Earth, xdfred? Actually, it doesn't matter. If you said 100 years old that would be less ridiculous than what you're documented as having championed above.

We've all had bad experiences, and I don't doubt that yours evidently was a very profound one, but we don't go around killing people in America for crimes less than murder and maybe one we oughta, child rape.

If you want to live like that, move to Nepal. And start a Taliban.

Try to restrain yourself from bombing an abortion clinic on your way out. "

" hetfield @ Jul 17, 2008 2:19 PM said, "I can make a better comp line for ya Cross.
Socialists-libbies-dems-stoners-centralists-independents-conservatives-the good guys. Stop skewing the numbers left, Cross!"

I have no idea what you are trying to say. But, as long as I'm writing, I'll ask why you apparently can make no distinctions between: progressives = liberals = Democrats = socialists = communists = totalitarians. They don't all believe the same thing--and what they believe aren't even close to each other. "

" to what was said in chester 11 July 17 2008 8:03 P,M.

Mega dittos "

" there you go again Chester,,,, I cannot believe someone as enlightened as you would support the death penalty for anybody. What a neanderthal conservative position to take.
And Jeroze shame on you for supporting the killing of human beings who only made a mistake and can be rehabilitated.
Jeez it's not like an abortion where at least we are saving tax dollars and preventing five or ten people being butchered by killing a couple of million babies.

Obama in 08
I have been to one more meeting than McCain, apparently this is a slam on him and a plus for me "

" Cross,

In all seriousness,

Please define all the above political philosophies and provide real world examples.

Perhaps if you can do this in an unbiased serious way, we could all print it out and use it as tool to enhance the already brilliant conversations this website provokes. It could be our rosetta stone on political philosophy, branching the divides and increasing our understandings and providing a roadmap for our disagreements.

I agree with you that one mans communist is another mans socialist is another man's marxist (often times wrongly defined) and if we at least know how you define each we won't be taking a chance of insulting you with the wrong label

one request though please keep it under 10,000 words.

In the spirit of detente til the next column "

" coalplant @ Jul 18, 2008 11:12 AM said, "Please define all the above political philosophies and provide real world examples."

In all seriousness, don't you see any differences in the listed political philosophies without an explanation of what are those differences? "

" So, the reality is taxes modify our behavior.

I think Clayson is scared his behavior will be modified in November. He knows the rich have been livin' it up since the great W behavior modifications. I suppose Clayson will write future articles about this and heroically call it W's legacy. "

" There is not enough money in the rich to allow Uncle Sam to play Santa Claus.

But it will help! "

" Looks like Clayson is angry Santa is leaving the Oval office.

The new Santa will want to know if the Neanderthal conservatives have been naughty (stashing the cash in the bank) or, nice (using the enormous tax modification to bolster the economy).

With the econ news lately I would think Santa is going take care of business, with a charismatic twist!

OUCH! "

" The amount of creativity, capital, available energy and the ability to create free exchanges also decreases when it is punished by increased taxation.

Try raising a middle class familiy under those conditions. "

" Wealth must eventually come from those who produce it. In a modern economy, unlike the time envisioned by our nanny-state engineers, wealth comes very seldom from physical labor. Wealth is produced by creativity, capital, available energy and the ability to create free exchanges. The role of government is to provide a stable and safe environment where regulations and laws don't change every minute and a person always knows what can and cannot be done.


This country was built on Slave Labor, Cheap Mexican Labor and middle class work ethic.

Sounds like Prof. Clayson has thrown in the towel this week and given the election to Barack Obama.

The rich fear taxes, poor people just pay them. "

" Another week of Prof. Clayson interpreting the Rush Limbush show for the stupid readers.

Nice touch with all the exclamation points, it almost makes me think of Rush Limbush's voice when I read Clayson's embelishment. "

" Seems to me that some people are very afraid of what is going to happen this November. No matter what the pundits say...people in this country are hurting and they are angry....on both sides.

It does no good to say any more. Change is coming. The conservative right has been in charge for most of the last 30 years...and most are no better off than they were when they signed up with that bunch. Sorry folks...but the times, they are a changin'....again. "

" independent---please stay and tell us more about your thoughts and the rationale behind them. I'm quite sure you contributed some thoughts from time to time in the past but I need your input to continue so that I better understand the ramifications of your political orbit. Whatever the subject for next week may be we always end up branching off into more general subjects about what each one deems is truth. Thanks for your comments but I want to understand them better. "

" Wow, independent? as always you skew left. i love your random, repeated posts. Anyways, Barack Hussein Obama is on the prowl, again. This guy is the biggest flip-flopping fibber(i wont say liar but if it sounds like a duck and looks like a duck...) he cant seem to get anything straight, and the left is taking notice and bailing by the droves. they would rather vote for a left leaner(McCain, for some stupid reason) then a left cheater.

Vote No to Socialism this fall. McCain clearly isnt gooney left, just partially.

Oh, did anyone see that outrageous characature of Obama and his Mrs? That was right on the mark!

have fun! "

" You are right about Mc Cain hetfield. He has flopped toward the people of the very conservative capitalistic greedy right. I would be much happier with him if he stayed the way he was in 2000 "

" How about that. Some level headed words from Coalplant.

Seriously.

I do support the death penalty for convicted murderers. I've tried to point out before that I'm not so much liberal as I am anti-neocon.
ALTHOUGH, these DNA issues are really, really serious business. There are many overzealous prosecutors in this country who have to make job quotas too and try to put people away on shaky evidence.
I also support drug testing for welfare recipients.
However, advocating the execution of a drug dealer of pot, even meth? No. Anyone see Josh Hamilton in the home run derby the other night? Most would label him as a user. From even remedial knowledge of that business though, it's a sure bet he's shared (which is the same as selling under mandatory sentencing) or offloaded a small amount in the process of being high or trading up. It's pretty common for drug users to do that kind of thing. I guess I just don't think we should kill Josh Hamilton. He seems like a decent fellow now.
What about the ex-dealers that now speak at schools? Who genuinely are sorry for their pasts and may have a favorable effect on even one kid? Maybe xdfred was just spouting off and I'm taking it too literally. Whatever, whatever.
Back to my liberal sliminess:
I strongly feel that many in this country overplay the victim card and I'm as offended by it as many of you cons. I just don't generalize about a wide demographic of people based on a few idiotic whiners.
I would support deportation of illegal immigrants starting at a certain date. Those here working and following our laws deserve amnesty. IMO.
I support drilling in ANWR. I don't really want to have it done but I think we need to look at the lesser of the two evils and reliance on Mideast oil has, in a very indirect, long routed kind of way, brought a lot of us to message boards like this fighting back and forth. 9/11 and our battling with radical Islamists had gotten a lot of us heavily involved in politics and we need to let the Middle East sort out their own problems. It would help if we weren't dependent on their #1 export.

It's not black and white. "

" to chester 11 on 7/19/5;06- I second that "

" chester11
wrote on Jul 17, 2008 8:03 PM:

" Xdfred:
The death sentence for a guy that sells a joint?
Did I understand that correctly?

I wish you and the other better than thou smarter than thou left wing would do one thing, and one thing only. Learn how to read and comprehend. I stated that if we as a society were to do that, I would volunteer to be the hangman. Translation: I have no sympathy towards people who sell drugs. They are responsible for the high murder rate this country has. They think their business is more important than anything else. You left wingers accuse American corporations of doing anything or harming anyone to make a profit. That describes drug dealers to a "T". So the next time someone lights up some loco weed, I hope they don't mind how mauch blood is on it. "

" Consider this xdfred ..... it's not really the drugs that are the problem it is the people...drugs are what they are controlling right now because that is the easiet thing to get their hands on. It could be anything ....anything that gives them control, territory and easy money. Guaranteed, if every illicit drug in the world was irradicated....gone...these same people would have a different product or service to provide so they could continue to maintain control, territory and money. "

" You are stretching it though, xdfred. You said that you would volunteer to be the hangman for someone selling a joint. Someone selling a joint just does not jibe with big soulless American corporations you make a comparison to.
Again, I mentioned an example such as Josh Hamilton. I add the guy that grows a few marijuana plants way out back near the fence. I even add the hippie selling LSD at a Grateful Dead concert. And..the corner runner in Philly whose got 3 miles of ghetto in either direction and has never known anything else.
Not condoning any of it, although there's a million arguments to be made about the destructive power of alcohol vs. that of marijuana, but you said that you would volunteer to kill anyone that sold a joint, if society passed such a fascist, Hitleresque law.
You said it man, not me. If you exaggerated or if you were referring to city suppliers or Columbian kingpins, that's one thing, but that's not what you said.
I'll let it go. "

" chester11
Corporations provide legitimate goods and services in exchange for a profit and are answerable to society through the law and citizen actions such as boycotts. Drug dealers murder competitors and anyone who gets in their way. They think they are above the law and epitomize the dark side of greed. Try and stop that LSD sale, and watch what happens to you.
Corporations do much more good than harm. They generate wealth, employ, and produce. Sure there are bad apples. And there are ways to take care of them that don't involve drive by shootings. But keep vilifying the evil rich and ignore the plight of people jailed in their homes by the criminal element.
Tax the rich. That will solve all our problems. "

" What did I JUST say in that last post, xdfred?
I gave examples of people that don't fit your profile.

Whatever dude, think whatever crazy bs you think.. "

" "I gave examples of people that don't fit your profile." And how do you know they don't fit the profile? How do you know what they would do to make that sale? Deal with competition? And what do their suppliers do if they switched, them that have suppliers? Shootings are occuring in Waterloo these days. Any bets on a connection to the illicit drug trade? And the people you describe so vaguely, how do I know they even exist? You being so honest and truthful and all. "