Agree and I do not plan on responding to them either
Posted By: Lifelong Democrat on 2007-10-15
In Reply to: Is this the liberal board anymore? - liberal democrat
I have better things to do than squander any more of my time responding to the troublemakers posting on this board. When someone here has something worth responding to, I will. There is no point in explaining, defending, or arguing with the people who are only here because they can't find any intelligent discussions on their own board.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
I agree, I was responding to some of the ugly remarks made below nm
x
Don't agree. His economic plan will...
kill what economy is left. How do you give 95% of the country a tax cut when nowhere near that many even pay taxes? He will add a trillion or more to the deficit with all his plans...and how is he going to pay for that with even less tax money coming in? Oh I forgot...he is going to tax those making over $250,000. Which will kill jobs from small businesses who are S corporations (there are thousands of those) and file their income taxes personally and not as a business. Oh well. That's just what they get for being successful...they lose their business or have to downsize. Thank you so much, Mr. Obama. That will put even more people in the lower class because of job losses. If ANYone is going to divide into rich and lower class and no in between, it is Obama.
Thanks for responding.
1) Agree with the point about Afghanistan. If our troops weren't burdened with fighting an unnecessary war in Iraq, we might be able to have a stronger presence in Afghanistan, as well as protect ourselves at home in case of a disaster (terroristic or natural). Our troops are spread too thin, and the military keeps raising the age limit and lowering physical standards for enlistment as a reseult.
2) I agree with this.
3) Bush has recently admitted that Iraq had no WMDs and also had nothing to do with 9/11. Do you think he is lying?
4) Tony Snow has made some really stupid statements, including blaming 9/11 on Bush 41.
5) Bush was the only leader who held out so the war could continue longer when the rest of the world pleaded for it to end.
Regarding your last sentence, whether I agree or not doesn't matter. You have your opinion. I have mine. I don't feel you wasted your breath or your time. Thank you for responding.
I believe she was responding to the
the exclamation point abuser, and not referring to teabaggers in general.
I don't think I was responding to those posts
I was responding to gt's, and no, I was not around when those other posts were made, and that's why I didn't comment on them.
I was responding to the "drunk" comment that gt made which was totally off par and shows what that gt is here for only one reason and that is to incite fighting, because calling someone a drunk without knowing them at all is definitely fighting words.
I don't know how you can render me a phoney, because I have told you nothing of my self. That is again, a baseless judgement. GT was typing nonsenical stuff right after telling someone their posting habits sounded like those of a drunk. If posting habits are evidence of drunkeness then gt needs to look at his or her posting style.
If you'd stop responding, so will the OP.
The more you carry on with posters like this, the more they will continue.
Moderator
No, I was responding to the past above yours, sorry,
did I get it wrong? yikes - I meant that for the 'first of all' post...
Huh? No. I was responding to the post
above that stated man and woman were created with the purpose of producing offspring. It had nothing to do with homosexuality.
I don't understand where you got the idea I meant anything else.
Do you think you've been responding to
just 1 person all day - LOL.
enclosed the post I was responding to
Below is the post I was responding to:
*But can a parent sacrifice their child to the military
that was the question...
and No most of the country doesn't agree with the self-proclaimed martyr, Sheehan.*
Maybe you should actually read the post before responding.
Bush is claiming they are working on nuclear weapons.
Iran has always claimed they are working on nuclear energy.
Who's lying? Which country has the track record for lying when it comes to reasons for declaring war on a country that didn't attack it first??
You're the one who keeps responding. Just quit your...sm
harassment.
I was speaking to you, no matter how you try to twist the converation, and say I can't follow the thread. Period.
My apologies... I thought you were responding to
I usually don't read her posts, so by the time I checked to see if you were responding to her or me, it was too late. Sorry about the hasty reply, but I what I wrote still stands, just in case anyone DOES mis-quote me.
Anyway, a great big OOOPS!
:-/
Just tired of responding to hatred....nm
x
Responding to you is a waste of my time.
I do not waste my time responding to your political posts, and I will not waste my time arguing semantics with you. I would not associate with you in my personal life, and you are not worth my time and energy on this forum. I am afraid you will have to find someone else to listen to your nonsense.
I am responding to the above post with my opinion
and am not interested in over-aggressive fights about such silliness. It is my opinion in answer to the question above.
Wasn't responding to your post.... but the sow's ear
--
Did I stop anyone from responding to your post?
you haven't answered mine.
the problem with responding too fast
...is that you end up leaving out important phrases!
The $72 an hour figure quoted in the article, I should have said, isn't made of *just* the wages and benefits of current employees--it's also including those paid to retired workers, the ones who paid into the retirement fund their whole lives, and are now living off those benefits.
In other words, you take the wages/benefits paid to the current 180,000 or so autoworkers, PLUS those paid to the 400,000 or so retirees and the 120,000 spouses of dead retirees, then divide that by the 180,000 current workers, then say, LOOK HOW MUCH THOSE GUYS GET PAID! It's an incredibly artifically inflated number.
And noooo one in the media ever seems to question it.
You did not follow who I was responding to!!!! YOU READ IT
dip
Also I was responding to the person who wrote that
say the opposite. BT stated it correctly.
Now nuff said.
Dont even bother responding to her posts -
() is most definitely NOT playing with a full deck.
You just don't have the capacity to understand I'm afraid... see ya, not responding anymore nm
to you
I am responding to all the posters who have made a living on this board denegrating everything that
new President does, even though he has just taken office, give me a break. George had 8 years, and each year was worse than the one before it.....I am not "whining" about Bush, the past is the past and I am trying very hard to focus on change, on a new future, on how we can all help, etc., not waving the Democratic flag, but the AMERICAN flag, I am just referring to history, nonpartison history.
I heard today Palin is responding to Levi's charges
by throwing the dirt back at him. I say that is how every woman her age should behave, right? Tit for tat.
And I think you have to read all of my posts, I am responding to arrogant inflammatory remarks, whic
Substantiation, no real substance, and yet these people are CHOOSING to start devisive threads with divisive remarks on this board, even making statements that historically are 100% inaccurate. Yes, I pray for unity, compassion, wisdom, etc., but the rabid Republicans on this board (and I do not mean all Rep., just a few loud ones), want to harshy judge and condemnn the new administration without giving things a chance, what would you call that? What about the "hit and run" posts by right wingers who continue to stir the pot with incorrect, slanted, and inflammatory remarks here? Fair is fair, I try to back up each statement I make with historical facts, I try to see both points of view (wow, I have actually agreed with Republicans on certain subjects!), but this board is not about me, or you, it is about all of us trying to hash out all the many struggles this nation now has, and with restraint, intelligence, and care look at each problem and try to help fix it. America comes first. Period.
Plan B.
I can't imagine Bush releasing funds intended for the banks and insurance companies to be released to the auto industry without imposing more stringent conditions on the UAW workers than the republican caucus and parochial southern senators have already tried to enact. Gettelfinger stands behind his "bankruptcy is not an option" statement. If Bush does not step forward, looks like liquidation could be just around the corner. JMHO.
bad plan
I do believe our senators need to go focus on this crisis, but, a few hours spared for a debate is not a waste of time. The election is close and people need to hear what both of the candidates have to say.
More on O's plan for
What I had in mind was his proposal to eliminate capital gains taxes for start-up and small businesses, the making work pay tax credit to help reduce the double taxation paid by self-employed (that "special" self-employment tax you pay if you are an IC) and the proposed $250 million annual investment in the National Network of Business Incubators designed to increase the number and size of small businesses.
Here's part of the answer to the earlier question about small businesses and health insurance cost/fine. He proposes a Small Business Health Tax Credit program of up to 50% of the premiums they pay for health care benefits for their employees. If you want to read more, here's the link:
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/SmallBusinessFINAL.pdf
Under O's plan, you will keep more of it.
x
That's not a bad plan
But the article itself says that France does not have socialized medicine - it's something completely different, especially with the lowered malpractice insurance and the tuition-free universities. I don't see that anything like that would be set up in the US, do you? It's not a bad idea, though. Definitley something to think about.
LOL. I like that plan.
.
God has a plan for everything
His main objective is that none of us die but, as loving as He is, He gives us choices. Many of us will make the wrong choice and die for it.
health plan
I have an idea, why doesnt Bush stop waging immoral wars and use our tax dollars for something constructive and life saving, like health coverage for those who die each year without it? You know why I would love a universal health plan? Because I care about my brother and sister and I care about making every Americans life better. Of course, you conservatives care about no one but yourselves. You make a few bucks, buy a home in a gated community, take the other streets so you dont pass the ghetto..and yet you claim you are christian..that is the most hypocritical statement of all. Do you not realize if Jesus walked this earth today, he would be a liberal democrat, helping the poor, the starving, the sick, the homeless, accepting all. Im so glad Im a liberal democrat. I dont think I could look at myself in the mirror or get a good nights sleep knowing my ideology is actually harming America, not helping it one bit.
Obama's plan
I assume you watched both conventions????? I watched the Dems and now I'm watching the Pubs. I am an INDEPENDENT. I would support Obama were it not for my research of the church he has been associated with for 20 years. This church, in my humble opinion, belongs to an extreme, radical, racist group. We don't need that in the White House. With the exception of illegal immigration, he pretty much addressed all the things that I feel are important to the future of my children and grandchildren and were it not for his affiliation with his chosen church, I would probably vote for him. . At least he had the good sense to select a person as his running mate who actually might be "ready on day one" to lead this country.
Secondly, again in my humble opinion, McCain has a few screws loose rattling around upstairs. He answers every question, even about how many houses he owns, with something like, "well, the longest time I spent anywhere was when I was a POW." Other than that it has been all about bashing Obama and his not having "experience." Then look what he did. Picked a little-known female who has been abroad exactly once and tries to pass her off as "experienced." Truth: She is a female and her state is the second largest producer of oil. Bush governed the biggest oil producing state. Enjoying those prices at the pumps? To this point all the pub speakers have pushed McCain's war record. What????? Do we need more war? I think a peacemaker would be better.
Now, before anyone pounces on me, I support NEITHER of these candidates and NEITHER will receive my vote. Either way, the middle class Americans, to which I expect most MTs belong, lose. Our government will change when and if the majority of Americans quit using their heads as a hatrack for the Democrat and Republican parties, kick them out and bring back government "of the people, by the people and for the people." Won't happen this time but maybe next time won't be too late.
OK. Let's rephrase. How does JM's new plan
x
Obama's tax plan
First of all, let me say I was undecided on this election until yesterday. Obama's tax plan scares me to death. I heard him on an interview yesterday, and he said that the top 5% of the country could *afford to help out those less fortunate to us*, meaning those that make above $200,000. He also said that someone making under $45,000 would *probably* not have to pay income taxes, because all the tax revenue would be generated from the top 5% of the country, again, who could *afford* to help out his fellow man.
So, here's my question. If I work my BUTT off making a great living for my family, who the heck is he to say I have to share it? My husband and I put ourselves through school to get a good education for ourselves, searched for good jobs, worked more than one sometimes, and enjoy or standard of living, because we worked hard for it and EARNED it. How dare he suggest that I have to share that with ANYONE, just because they dont' have as much. We give to quite a few neighborhood organizations and national charities, we do not keep every penny for ourselves.
If he does get elected and puts this new plan in place, why would people work hard to make a good living if quite a bit chunk of it is going to be taken away? Why not just sit back, work as little as you want, stay under that $40,000 radar, not pay income taxes, and have the government give you some other *rich* guy's money because you don't have as much?
This really made my mind up for me. It's time this county taught some personal responsibility and accountability, and I do not think he is the one for the job!
And so how exactly does McCain plan to fix
He could sell Alaska to the Japanese. They need the land & the natural resources, and they most definitely have the money.
McCain's plan...
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ba2f1c-c03f-4ac2-8cd5-5cf2edb527cf.htm
Not as described above.
Obama's Plan:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/
They seem very similar to me...big difference is Obama wants the government to control it and McCain wants individuals to control their own health care. I don't see a problem with that.
Which is why I am still voting McCain.
if you plan on voting
you will need to keep things like OBAMA and OSAMA straight. The political system was based on the assumption that voters would know the difference between a tall black man running for president and a tall man in a sheet running for cover. Study up. Only a few more weeks . . . I'm betting you can do it.
Do either of the candidates have a plan
for this financial crisis that does not involve the taxpayers bailing out the US?
So how would this plan affect you?
If it doesn't apply to you, then nothing about your mortgage would change. How is that unfair to you? Would it be more fair to charge the taxpayers, including you, whether in you're arrears or not or owning a mortgage or not, the $700 billion dollars?
I don't get what about this is upsetting to you. You already have a better rate and your credit must be great. Any resolution to this problem should not result in someone making out better than before the problem started.
You are correct about his plan not being...sm
socialized medicine. I don't think the majority of people have insurance through their employers anymore. If you don't you will be insured based on what you can afford to pay, and you will keep your own doctor. Vermont already has such a plan and it works great.
His plan includes ---
He wants to provide coverage for everyone that needs it. If you have coverage already, then you keep it. If you don't have coverage, then you are able to buy the same coverage the federal employees have. He only wants to mandate that a family have coverage for their children and you can get it anywhere you want to.
My state already is using almost the same plan as....sm
Obama's and it seems to be working just fine.
He's changed his plan but yet again..
The McCain-Palin campaign has critized his tax plans as welfare, so Barack’s campaign has come back and tweaked it to add a work requirement. (They will materialize things out of thin air as needed to get elected.) This comes from the New Hampshire Union Leader in reply.
Obama Tax Plan
I haven't been here for a while, and if this has already been posted below somewhere, I apologize for duplicating it.
The following link will take you to a site that will show you how much money Barack Obama will save you on taxes, compared to John McCain. (Remember, McCain will be taxing your health insurance benefits for the first time in American history.) Depending on your income, there is quite a difference between the two plans.
http://alchemytoday.com/obamataxcut/
Obama tax plan
McCain may be taxing us, but he is anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage
the EIC is a tiered plan, Sam -
If you get earned income it is very low paying at the bottom of the scale, then tops out in the middle, and progressively drops out to 0 by the time you get to the top.
You have to work to get it, so therefore it encourages people to work and not just live off the government.
I have been hearing that O plan
of sharing the wealth will put us in the GREAT DEPRESSION just like back when Hoover was in office, exept this time, it will be worse because many more people make more than 100,000 a year than they did years ago. So basically it will be spreading the wellfare around.
Martial law plan?!
Things are really getting delusional now. Bush is probably counting the days til he can get out of there and let it be someone else's problem.
|
