HockeyDad
14 years ago
President Obama's plan only adds 80 billion is taxes to the wealthy yet he runs a budget deficit of 1.4 trillion. It is a token measure.

Whose the Democrat's daddy?
RICKAMAVEN
14 years ago
HockeyDad

tag you're it
HockeyDad
14 years ago
No I'm not.

You're the victim of an elaborate hoax perpetuated by both political parties.
RICKAMAVEN
14 years ago
wheelrite

i know it's food invented by chinese for jews.

i don't like dead pigeons, cats or dogs on a bed of rice no matter how it's cooked.


cooking is just heating meat until the fiber breaks down so it can be chewed. meat has no
flavor except tainted. if it had any flavor, spices wouldn't be needed to flavor it.

fresh peas in the pod have flavor, that's why you can't buy them

that's why everything tastes like chicken which without shake and bake or dry onion soup
mix sprinkled on it and micro ed in unsalted chicken broth. for ten minutes makes it taste like
chicken.

if you cook spam until it's almost crisp, it has taste, the taste of a salt lick. the company that
invented spam did so just to prove there is no part of a pig you can't be convinced to eat.

i once even ate fried liver because i wanted to get laid by the cook.
neither was worth the trouble of eating
FuzzNJ
14 years ago
'Strict Constitutionalists' again wanting to change the Constitution for political reasons.

Irony that right wingers can't see.
HockeyDad
14 years ago
They don't really want to change the Constitution. It is just part of the game.
DrafterX
14 years ago
I don't think this stuff would bother me if I was on the welfare....... might be a nice change.... 😟
HockeyDad
14 years ago
Those on the welfare tend to want more welfare.

Probably just a coincidence.
DrafterX
14 years ago
🤔
I should get another SS nnumber.... 😟
rizzyo
14 years ago
The only issue with an actual amendment is that it would lead to significant problems in times where the US is necessitated to embrace deficit spending, such as times of war.

We shouldn't need an amendment for a common sense issue.

RICKAMAVEN
14 years ago
last time the republicans wanted a constitutional amendment was when
arnold s. became the governor of california.

the same group recently called birthers wanted to amend the constitution to allow
non native born americans to run for and hold office as the president.

why are such a stupid group of people allowed any influence in the government,

this group has most of it's heads up it's collective asses.

perry, who has not announced he is running, is now the leading republican running
for the office of president of the usa, the country he wanted to succeed from.
no wonder the base puts these people in office. the base is dumber then the
office holders.

on the other hand, obama needs some balls. elizabeth warren was the best qualified person to run the consumer protection agency, that she worked hard to form, and mr pres throwed her under the bus..

clinton might have copped a feel, but he wouldn't dump her like obama did.

good luck on perry, remember what the last governor of texas did to this country.
jackconrad
14 years ago
And lets not forget LBJ
RICKAMAVEN
14 years ago
jackconrad

jumped ship when he saw a little water instead of staying and fixing what he had done.

might have been involved in JFK assassination.
ZRX1200
14 years ago
Rick....which tea party members wanted Arnold for POTUS? you talk out your azz sometimes you know that. And where did tea party memers ask for a constitutional amendment to elect foreign born people?

The so called "birthers" you may recall were the ones that were wanting a US born canidate.......
RICKAMAVEN
14 years ago
ZRX1200

the amendment to allow arnold to run for president was long befoe the tea party
group so it has nothing to do with that group

the tea party group is no more then a group of idiots, who have one track minds. cut
spending. let the country fall apart. something good will happen later. the good fairy
will pay for edumacation and bridges that are so old they are not safe to drive on. doesn't
matter they will be out of office in 2 or 6 years and they will have been nothing and have
done nothing and return to the nothing they were and still are.

my way or the highway means they will soon be on the highway.

the way out of the financial crisis and the no jobs is for the government to stimulate the economy
until we have increased GDP, tax the rich who have stolen their money from the rest of us, special deductions for corporate jets my asss, not until every child goes to bed with a warm full belly.

the country is back to 1920 again. the rich want to eliminate child labor laws. do you approve?
rfenst
14 years ago

Just imagine the temptation of being able to borrow an unlimited amount of money at 2.9% interest that someone else will have to pay back later.

HockeyDad wrote:




Why pay 2.9% when you can get it cheaper?
HockeyDad
14 years ago

ZRX1200

tax the rich who have stolen their money from the rest of us, special deductions for corporate jets my asss, not until every child goes to bed with a warm full belly.

the country is back to 1920 again. the rich want to eliminate child labor laws. do you approve?

RICKAMAVEN wrote:




You do realize that if everyone just gave in to Obama's plan for taxing the rich and cutting corporate tax breaks, it would raise $160 billion per year. The current Federal budget year is 1.4 trillion in deficit. That means Obama's solution is to cover the deficit with 10% new revenue, 90% new borrowing. ....and that is a great plan for America?

Obama's 10 year budget projections taken exactly as is forecasts a trillion dollar deficit every year and a doubling of the USA national debt during his 8 years in office. The IMF and credit agencies are the ones that slammed that and called for 4 trillion in debt reduction across that plan, not the Republicans. That is what started this whole mess.

While pretending to be worried about child labor laws and children going to bed with a full belly, do you really believe that doubling the national debt that those children will one day have to repay through years of austerity so that we can spend the money now on ourselves is good stewardship?
rfenst
14 years ago

'Strict Constitutionalists' again wanting to change the Constitution for political reasons.

Irony that right wingers can't see.

FuzzNJ wrote:



Never mind the irony. No one even answered the question!
HockeyDad
14 years ago
What question?

I did in post 46.
rfenst
14 years ago

While pretending to be worried about child labor laws and children going to bed with a full belly, do you really believe that doubling the national debt that those children will one day have to repay through years of austerity so that we can spend the money now on ourselves is good stewardship?

HockeyDad wrote:




No one is ever going to repay much, if any at all. Instead, we will keep overspending and then hyper inflate the economy and nominally repay debt with worthless "money". A few years later on down the road, lenders will forget what happened and will start pumping money into the U.S. again. Works like a charm for the rest of the world. Will work for the U.S. too. It is only just a matter of time- many years out...
Users browsing this topic