starfish

Not winning the war? We haven't lost a military battle yet! :lol:

Hey pras, you better watch it before you get suspended for two days or something for changing the subject?

Mike a major problem you have is your awareness of history began like when? Maybe 1 or 2 years ago? You were what something like what 3 years old during the Gulf War in 1991 weren't you? I have shoes older than you, hehee! You have never even voted once, never paid a tax bill and probably never had a job? Your still living at home sucking on your parents teet and haven't entered the adult world of personal responibility. But what you do have is some dopey misguided political based mental disorder that has you searching for any type of report on the internet that fullfills your liberal ideals with false or an incomplete context of reality. For the record - no I don't watch CNN. By looking at their ratings, I'm not alone! Hahaa! Mike there was no internet for me to get the information I wanted to know in 1991. I was there as an adult witnessing it on a daily basis.

Mike I'm not trying to insult you but perhaps we should find someone to start a thread on economics and I might be able to help set the record straight because you really have no idea. Your knowledge of the war on terror, Bin Laden, or just about anything is often so far from the truth I wonder if you make this stuff up? Although your beliefs are shared with your anti-American liberal friends who blame us for all that is wrong in life it is a bunch of nonsense. You really should be questioning them first than to get pissed at me when I tell you that liberalism is a mental disorder. Stick around though, one day you will understand. Regards, starfish http://www.thewednesdayreport.com/twr/bin_laden.htm#history

From the steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy which is driving down the budget deficit this year, even though spending has climbed because of new entitlements(Bush's worst mistake), the war in Iraq and the cost of hurricane relief. The White House officials announced that the tax receipts will be about $250 billion above last year's levels and that the deficit will be about $100 billion less than what they projected six months ago. The rising tide in tax payments has been building for months, making it easier for both the administration and Congress to finesse the big run-up in spending over the past year. Tax revenues are climbing twice as fast as the Bush administration predicted early this year, so fast that the budget deficit could actually decline this year. The main reason is a big spike in corporate tax receipts, which have nearly tripled since 2003, as well as what appears to be a big rise in individual taxes on stock market profits and executive bonuses. Another reason is the alternative minimum tax collection scam invented in the 70's to capture a few of the top non-payers of federal income tax that over the course of time has entraped millions Everytime a tax-cut has been implemented the revenues collected has gone up. Everytime a tax increase has been implemented the revenues declined. We need to make the Bush tax-cut permanent. This is a new type of war where we have seen young men, women and children strap bombs to themselves and cause mass casualties. Believe me, nobody wants to be in that God-forsaken hellhole one second more than needed. What we don't want to do is to turn that area over to Iran, Syria or al-Qaeda. Could you imagine the funding made available from all of the oil money over there for terrorist training, and producing weapons of terror that any of those groups could unleash on America if we just up and left? We need to finish this the right way and if it includes gettin ugly well then so be it! The liberals have us playing "be nice" to these freakin terrorists which has extended this campaign. It's time to put up a battle like they have never seen before and end their ability to terrorize their new government which would cause these and other despots around the globe to rethink getting in the cross-hairs of the US Military ever again! We should start by ending the whole Hussein trial crapola and off him, al-Sadr and his militia.

Here is something just as sick. Read this one first---> http://www.webbforsenate.com/press/release.php?id=209 Then check out this one---> http://www.drudgereport.com/flashaw.htm This one really disgusts---> http://www.mlive.com/news/bctimes/index.ss....xml&coll=4 Liberalism is a mental disorder :lol:

Is the mod here semi-retired?

If you are concerned in protecting the honor and integrity of this thread, what is stopping you from changing the title back to something more mature? Regards - starfish

Nice job! Peace be with you! :D

Hmmm....Okay I'll read it, but why for such a smarty like you is your written expression so poor? quote name='EvolveT5R' date='Oct 21 2006, 05:59 PM' post='792969'] 2) There first link is off a super-conservative website, so don't pull that sh*t. You want facts, go to CNN, not some unheard of crap that you find on one of your conservative bookmarks. The second site doesn't work, so perhaps it was deleted cause it was BS.

Thank you for your point and it is well taken (at least it will be by me). People fail to realize that we are all lobbyists in one form or another. There is no such thing as "the little guy" who is left out of the eyes of government.

Mike, where in the world do you do you come up with this jibberish? http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadA...le.asp?ID=17007 "It was not George W. Bush's foreign policy -- which has liberated one nation from the tyranny of a madman craving WMDs -- that allowed North Korea to build nuclear weapons. The DPRK may have already possessed more than one such missile by the time he got into office in 2001. It was Bill Clinton's nonfeasance that bought Pyongyang almost ten years to pursue nuclear weapons development. Shortly after North Korea first announced its nuclear program, former president Jimmy Carter rushed to the workers paradise to conduct personal, unauthorized peace talks. As Bill Clinton attempted to play it tough in public, Carter promised North Korea's leaders that no military response would be forthcoming, a promise Clinton later felt duty-bound to keep. Thus did Clinton allow the weak-kneed former president to conduct a private foreign policy in his stead. Carter and Clinton drew up a massive transfer of wealth -- a bribe -- in return for North Korea's unverifiable promise to end its nuclear program. As part of the deal, the United States provided North Korea with light-water nuclear reactors, food, and fuel oil (some 10,000 metric tons of which was diverted to the Red Chinese Army). Bill Clinton offered a different "solution" during this time period. In August 1998, North Korea launched a Taepo Dong missile over Japan's northernmost island. Two months later, the United States re-opened direct, bilateral talks with North Korea -- rushing a generous $15 million aid package to the DPRK in the meantime. Throughout his presidency, Bill Clinton met North Korean belligerence with tough words and fistfuls of dollars. It was eight years of treading water. And that decade cost the lives of uncounted thousands of hapless North Korean citizens whom the government starved to death while pursuing WMDs." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061011/ap_on_...s_nuclear" Bush gave scant attention to that domestic blame game, repeatedly turning the spotlight back on what he called "North Korea's provocation." He said he learned North Korea can't be trusted from the experience of the Clinton administration's 1994 pact with Pyongyang, which offered energy help in return for a nuclear freeze but which the North secretly defied nearly from the start. He defended his decision to switch nearly immediately to a policy of refusing to talk with North Korea except when other regional players were also at the table. "I appreciate the efforts of previous administrations. It just didn't work," he said. quote name='EvolveT5R' date='Oct 19 2006, 09:10 AM' post='790414'] And capatlist america is not something to be proud of. Looking at Sigon, the stuff that is made there is printed "made in USA," but how come they have a different sallary and living condition which is AT HALF the line of poverty and minimum wage in the US? Tom Delay saw this and said it was a great accomplishment for U.S. capatalism, it isn't something to be proud of. Capatalist is taking advantage of poor countries for largre company profits. ~Mike

Ummmm nice try Mike but the treaty you speak of that Clinton and Madeleine Notsobright offered to Korea was in violation before Clinton had left office. They botched that one badly all on their own way before Bush took office. But hey.....Where are all the NO Nuke liberals and their protests of Iran and North Korea anyway? They stay right here because they're nothing but a bunch of commie pinko's attacking capatalism in America.

Mike I hate to be the one to break it to you first, I am sure your mommy and daddy love you tremendously and tell you daily what a smart young man you are, but you are being lied to. You are an imbecile. You googled "Bush scandals" and these two links were the first to come up. The links cited were put together by left-wing liberal blogger hacks who like you were looking to find opinions that already matched theirs even if they were flat out wrong which most of these presumptions truly are. If you and your Democratiic party supporters are honestly interested in defeating Islamo-fascist terrorists and winning the war on terrorism, you should begin by calling for every radical left-wing liberal judge and lawyer to be put behind bars. Liberalism is a mental disorder.

Why is that? You don't know any facts and are unwilling to seek them to have an informed opinion, yet when confronted with them you are in denial and say that they no longer matter? That's not a winning debate strategy by my terms. It is an embarrassment. Haha!

What is he taking up......Space?

What is it that you do to earn a living? I hope it's not being a brain surgeon or anything too important?

The facts and percentages of the taxes and who pay them are not numbers that I made up but numbers that are calculated by the IRS. I'm sorry that I had unintentionally left off the link but here it is. http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/indtaxstats/ar...=133521,00.html Everyone of your points made was proved unequivocally to be false and misleading. The only thing harsh in my reply I guess would be in the awakening from the lies and distortions you are in comfort with? I could easily go on and rebute further to these current statements you have made again here, but it would just be piling on.

Mike, why do you keep your head in the sand then to seek truth? Because it doesn't coincide with your preconceived opinions? Liberalism is a mental disorder.

There is nothing compassionate about liberalism. Liberalism is a self imposed detriment. I don't know of anyone... including GW Bush himself... who considers the President to be "Liberal". Your mouth runs foul with no truth to back up your statements. Bush will be known for his actions in protecting the US and the world from dangers of Islamic-fascism and the real threats they represent to freedom. This is a joke right? Strong leaders do not care about polls. They set high standards. They live by these standards and mentor their followers. They create and share a vision of their goals. They fully understand that they need to make hard and difficult choices and not waiver. Take any past great American President or military commander and compare them with any current liberal who is shooting off his ignorant mouth. What do you notice? This is getting old. Your knowledge of the Clinton economy is inaccurate. The advertised Clinton budget surplus was a generous calculation based upon a over exuberance in the market for dot coms and other high risk unprofitable high tech corporations. When the NASDAQ crashed in March of 2000, Clinton's forecast evaporated and his surplus never materialized. There was never any surplus cah "in the bank". 6 months after Clinton spoke of his record surplus the market collapsed. Smoke and mirrors accounting by Clinton/Gore. http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/s...linton.surplus/ http://www.stock-market-crash.net/nasdaq.htm On Oct. 17, 1996, Clinton admits: "It might surprise you to know that I think I raised them [taxes] too much, too." He blames the Republicans—even though not one Republican voted for his budget. Two days later, under attack from his liberal base, Clinton reverses himself, claiming responsibility and pride for his tax increases: "I take full responsibility, proudly, for what we did. It [raising taxes] was the right thing to do." Less than 3-1/2 dollars out of every $100 paid in income taxes in the United States is paid by someone in the bottom 50% of wage earners. The top 1% pay over a third, 34.27% of all income taxes. The top 5% pay 54.36% of all income taxes. The top 10% pay 65.84%. The top 25% pay 83.88%. The top 50% pay 96.54%. The bottom 50%? They pay 3.46% of all income taxes. The top 1% is paying nearly ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%! And who earns what? The top 1% earns 16.77% of all income (2002: 16.12%). The top 5% earns 31.18% of all the income (2002: 30.55%). The top 10% earns 42.36% of all the income (2002: 41.77%); The top 25% earns 64.86% of all the income (2002: 64.37%) And the top 50% earns 86.01% (2002: 85.77%) of all the income. So what did Clinton give us on tax cuts? Typical doom and gloom liberal politics. http://partners.nytimes.com/library/politi...inton-govs.html But the Leader GW Bush saw through the baloney and gave us this. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/june01/tax_6-7.html And again in 2003 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/reports/taxplan.html And the Leader GW Bush was right. http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/061012/wall_street.html?.v=44

Your insane! Liberalism is a mental disorder.

The Democrats' didn't condemn Democratic Congressman Gerry Studds for his actual sex... not just perverted electronic flirting... with a page, they gave him ovations and applause. Congressman Barney Frank remains in office as a respected Democrat even though an aide ran a prostitution ring out of his apartment. The Democrats told us that Clinton's contempt of the Oval Office was a private matter. In my estimate Foley did the right thing by resigning. Your party seems to be content with poor behavior. The Republican party is not 100% perfect, but we do quickly remove offensive or corrupt members unlike the Democratic organization. Your awfully defensive here? Certainly a sign of immaturity. Why would I think Bush is a liberal? I enjoy my tax cut and so does the market. That doesn't mean I am in 100% lock step agreeance with all his policies. No one gets 100% of what they want. Historians will show one day that GW Bush will be thought of as one of our best presidents in these troubled times despite a media that is bent 90% liberal. That really irks the likes of Clinton and Carter doesn't it? Clinton spent 8 years in office having a big party with now nothing to show for it but scandle after scandle. Now he has spent everyday of the last 6 years trying to lie his way out of it and the media supports this rubbish. That's telling! The Democratic platform is old and worn out. They have no new ideas, no new plans, no new nothing other than to raise taxes, open borders, spread socialism and multi-culturalism, to divide Americans every way they can to show people as victims of inequality or injustice. They have the same old 1960's anti-corporate, anti-capatalist, anti-law, anti-police, anti-military, anti-war anti-energy development message. And you think these people are progressive? Sure I could have been a liberal, but I chose to be conservative because it has real meaning and requires thinking, planning and doing for myself, not reliance upon other tax payers with there redistribution of wealth schemes and reliance upon government programs to fund my basic needs. If the country were in fact 90% liberal there still would be no way in hell I would join them nor would it change my opinion of them. Liberalism is a mental disorder. http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/11/D8KMJBT81.html

Since when did liberal democrats condem homosexuality? Are the liberal democrats now coming forth to keep these homosexuals from being involved with children? Will the liberals support disqualifying them from holding jobs where the homosexual might have contact with such as school teachers or Scout Masters, etc.? It seems to me that the Liberal democrats promote homosexuality not condem it. I see the young liberals like you recognize that homosexuality for what it is, a perversion. Liberalism is a mental disorder.

So this is the threshold you use to measure the qualifications and character of the highest elected public official in the land? How long has your mother been abusing you? Liberalism is a mental disorder!

Cuz she's a lying sack o' shipt! http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061011/ap_on_...s_nkorea_mccain http://www.thevillager.com/villager_22/whatshedoin.html http://www.breitbart.com/news/na/cp_w101081A.xml.html