OT: Time for another tax cut

You democrats should stick to something you understand.

You democrats should stick to something you understand.

It's not easy being wealthy. mark_

I think you should pay more taxes Diz. You have been getting off to easy.

Eh? Why do that, when we can just borrow the money and let future generations pay for our high-flying lifestyles? It's not like children have a say in this - they can't vote. ROFL. We won, get over it. ROFLMAO. I'm a right-winger now. Fuck the future. I'm buyin' me an SUV.

I'm hoping you will get to pay more taxes dizz. You sound like a person of means.

Only people of means think it's wrong to steal from future generations? Only people of means think that they should pay their bills?

"Regular" people, people who want lots of things that they can't afford, think it's okay to "borrow" money with no intention of ever paying it back? (Sadly, this seems to be the case, with Americans of all classes.)

You are naive and idealistic. Dizz you should sit back and take a few months off to think about it.

I'm super glad I'm past borrowing. It's a good feeling. I hope you can reach it eventually. mark_

mark_digital? trolled:

We fail to see what is good about reaching a point where you can no longer borrow because nobody will lend you any money.

cordially, as always,

rm

I've only seen that happen once and it was only from one source. The institution wanted the borrower to request more than what he had in the bank already. As far as calling me a troll, why are you anti-social?? mark_

Why do you assume that I've not already "reached it"?

'Course, none of us has any choice about the damn spendthrifts in Washington forcing debt upon us whether we like it or not...

Bad assumption on my part. Sorry.

If the Dims would not block every attempt to cut spending, the budget deficit would not be so high.

mike hunt

Typical bald-faced lie from a right-winger.

We all know who's in control now...

How ironic, after seeing you make an ass of yourself, AGAIN, in the WWI discussion. LOL

Oh, we "always operated with a budget during time of war", did we? LOL

A rather bigger war, wouldn't you say, top poster? LOL

Well that, and it was an ACTUAL war. There's no declared war going on right now. Just men dying for no good reason.

It is not a BALD face lie, but that OK Dizzy AKA Idiot, Troll, Stupid, Moron etc we know you like to comment of subjects of which you have little or no knowledge so we did not expect you to know 60 votes are need to 'control' the US Senate. There are only 55 Republican Senators. The Dims have consistently undermined any efforts to reduce government spending.

mike hunt

"Dizzy AKA Idiot, Troll, Stupid, Mor>

1. The 60% rule is of limited value and has not been used in spending debates. With arm-twisting and favors, the Republicans should be able to get their own way on spending in the Senate. This rule hsa never been a factor in previous budget battles, no matter what party had the majority.
2. Spending and taxation bills originate in the House, where there is no

60% rule and the Republicans are firmly in control and have been diligently packing spending bills with pork. The bills the House have been sending to the Senate are massive increases in spending.

1. Dubya hasn't vetoed a single bill to attempt to rein in spending. Clinton was willing to go to the mat and let government shut down to control spending. Dubya doesn't have the stones for it.
2. Dubya's budgets (the pre-pork suggestions his branch provides) all represented increases.
3. The White House originally forecast the cost of the war at billion. It's now at 0billion and it's not over and my deep suspicion is that some of the cost has been hidden (for instance, almost all NG units have been stripped of their vehicles - has their replacement been included in the cost?).

Now, compare Dubya's pathetic performance to, say, Nixon's. Nixon had his faults, true, and he deserved impeachment for interfering with the election but look up Nixon and "sequestered" and see how a real Republican manages the budget his way against an opposing-party Congress. Unless one counts the Dixiecrats as Republicans. One could make a case for that.

Or compare to Clinton's. Clinton managed two surpluses. That speaks for itself.

Oh, and if you're bitching about bald-faced lie vs, perhaps, bold-faced lie, "bald" is the correct term. You can look it up or, perhaps, consult a high school English teacher in a good school district. You might just check in with the History department for a little remedial work in that subject, too. You need it.

wrote

*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com *** *** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from ***