The evidence is obvious in the thread if you read it. Questions asked and ignored, obvious contradictions pointed out and ignored. It's ok HD. Your were obviously caught in a logical bind and ignoring it was probably your best option. Potts would have kept arguing losing positions.

FuzzNJ wrote:

Refresh me, what are you talking about as you address the jury with your evidence? I been gone for a bit this afternoon due to work.

HockeyDad wrote:

You investigated and found out she was illegal. You also found out she paid only maybe 50 bucks, AND you know the hospital got the rest of the money from the State of California from a program that you can't name, look up or even define, all while your wife was having a baby.

Okie dokie. You are just full of sh*t, holy crap.


Hey, I saw a UFO once. Just trust me.

FuzzNJ wrote:

That you for your non-answer. Do you want something explained? If so, ask it.

HockeyDad wrote:

I didn't have to investigate anything. She is known personally to us. And wether it is spelled out in some program or not it happens. Whether you believe it or not is up to you. I'm just relating from personal experience which is a far better gauge than anything the government is willing to tell you.

apachelm wrote:

Did, several times, on this thread. As I've said. Continue to ignore it and ask me to do all the work for you with cuts and pastes etc when all you have to do is scroll back and read I'll just accept that as the surrender that it is. Oooh, a french surrender! (that was cheap and not my style)

FuzzNJ wrote:

What is it you would like to know?

HockeyDad wrote:

The dems increased the defense budget under Reagan from 4-6 % of GDP? What Reagan did best was shift the tax burden from the wealthy, ie capital gains, corporations and old investment to new investment and payroll taxes, aka the middle class, where it still is today.

But dp will still blame the liberals for that.

FuzzNJ wrote:

FuzzNJ,

You are in whiny bitch mode.

HockeyDad wrote:

Yes, let's ignore the social spending and pretend defense spending (which won the Cold War) was the only cause of the deficit. And your best "comeback" to the success of the Reagan model is to lament this supposed shift in tax burden (with no proof or specifics). I guess that about sums up the intellectual bankruptcy of the left.

robertknyc wrote:

I just showed this thread to my family and they all laughed at you all and told me how special I am.

ZRX1200 wrote:

I'm the normal one here, you're the "far out in the galaxy" liberal wacko so no, I'm not insane...that would be a description of you. And for the sake of discussion, so what if the tax burden shifted? The economy soared with over 20 million new jobs and increasing goverment revenue. Everyone who wanted to prosper could. Too bad that's not the case now.

robertknyc wrote: