 |
|---|
| ZOT!!!! |
Whip out another of your aged accounts. Your games simply don't work any more. People have heard the song before and no one is buying.
Posted on 11/22/2002 9:59:40 AM PST by New Revolution
Just don't tap his head. Nature abhorrs a vacuum, and it might implode if you crack it.
Trust me, tax cuts are never permanent. But the purpose of the tax cut is to put a limit on the ambitions of politicians who see no limits on what they could accomplish if only they had a little more of your money in their pocket. The irony is that tax cuts usually result in an increase in tax revenues. If you were really worried about funding your favorite programs, you would support a tax regimen that maximized revenue, which is to say, lowered taxes. Why ever would you support increased tax rates which reduce tax revenue?
and repealing the so called "death" tax
This is intended to help the family farmer. The present tax code is helping to destroy the family farmer, who is typically asset rich and cash poor. It is not unusual for a farmer to be a millionaire on paper, which means upon his death the farm must be broken up to pay the death tax. This just pushes more land into corporate control. I'm ok with that, hey, I'm a Republican. But if you want to save the family farm, you have to end the death tax.
to the detriment of the Social Security (which he promised not to touch)
Social Security is bankrupt. Your favorite politicians robbed it clean to the bone. There is nothing there. Furthermore, your favorite politicians voted to tax Social Security income, and voted again to raise taxes on Social Security income. Does this not strike you as odd?
to the benefit to tax payers earning over $350,000 (the "truly" rich and greedy)
I hate to tell you this, but the Clinton cabinet had more millionaires in it than either Bush's.
while the deficits will stretch from here to the moon and beyond
Most people have a short memory. A balanced budget was a Republican dream for generations, but never possible until the Gingrich revolution. It was the combination of an expanding economy and Gingrich's hard knuckle brawling that brought us the first balanced budget ever. This was over the objection of Clinton and the Democrats, although once it was approved they quickly reversed course and claimed credit.
What Bush did upon taking office was to trim the budget to eliminate the "projected" budget surplus that was beginning to accumulate. Its important to remember that this "tax cut" hasn't really taken effect yet. So any supposed bad effects are still in the future; as of right now there is no tax cut, its still a gleam in some speechwriter's eye. Who knew at that time we would soon be at war. So suddenly the budget is expanding, as it should, to pay for beans and bullets. And in the middle of a war, the Democrats are trying to expand the budget for non-military programs. Wasn't the budget for these things big enough when Clinton was in office? Has the social need for more free stuff suddenly grown now that we are at war?
appointing reactionary conservative judges to the federal bench,
What is a reactionary? Conservatives want to appoint judges who will administer the law as it is written, in accordance to the constitution as it is written. Conservatives believe that the rules for altering the law and the constitution must be obeyed. Change it if you want to, but do it legally. This is the only way anyone can have any confidence coming before a judge. If everyone knows the judge will enforce the law as it is written, most conflicts evaporate, since anyone who can read can see what the law says for themselves. But if the law depends upon the opinion of a judge, who sees himself as having the power to override the written law, we set ourselves up for chaos and corruption. Who, under such conditions, would dare to face a judge without first paving the way with loads of campaign cash and phone calls from influential friends?
which means the Roe V. Wade decision is toast and when overturned women will be forced to seek out back alley abortions
If Roe V Wade is overturned, that simply returns the abortion issue to the individual states. If there is popular support in that state for abortion, which there probably is in most states, precisely nothing will change. As a constitutionalist, I will be happier, however, because by the constitution the federal government should have no say in the issue either for or against. This is properly a state issue.
I find your choice of words here interesting: "women will be forced to seek out ... abortions". Which women are forced to seek out abortions anywhere? A fundamental requirement for liberty, to be a free person in a free land, is the willingness to accept responsibility for what we do. People do not become pregnant by magic, and if they do, no one forces them to seek out an abortion. But in the present political climate, the overturning of Roe V Wade will not end abortion in the US. If the voters want it, they will continue to have it.
I find it odd, however, that so much passion is expended on the Democratic side of the aisle on behalf of an industry devoted to killing. Not that killing can't be an honorable profession, mind you, I have nothing but respect for soldiers who confront dictators, and even some grudging respect for the gallowsmen who dispatch serial killers to their reward. But I just can't work up any great admiration for people who pervert their medical skills sucking the life from people who have yet to commit any crime whatever. Maybe they would have, had they been born. Since most of their mothers are Democrats, I suppose I should support abortion as it represents the wholescale slaughter of future Democrats, at the hands of other Democrats. Its odd that a political party would have as its fundamental tenet the slaughter of its own future adherents.
winnable nuclear war,
We won. Winning a nuclear war, preferably without firing a shot, is imminently better than losing one. The key to winning is to be prepared to fight it, survive it, and win it. If you are prepared, you may not have to pull the trigger. But if you are not prepared, it is almost a certainty that your greatest fears will come to visit you.
invading a Caribbean island,
I vaguely remember that Grenada was returned to democracy under Reagan. I also remember that Clinton brought Aristide to power in Haiti. Since Aristide was a psychopath, I know which of the two situations gives me more pride. But the head of the Democratic party at the time was the well-paid lobbyist for the Haitian government, both the Baby Doc Duvalier regime and the Aristide regime. The generals who overthrew Duvalier made the mistake of not hiring prominent Democratic lobbyists, and so were replaced by Aristide, with US military assistance, who was wiser.
I could go on, but I'm hungry.
Jimrob, when are you going to start banning the Admin_moderators.
So9
I hang out in DU all the time now.
Its fun to watch the 'rats panic.
I've even been posting there under a different name.
I've been saying this exact same stuff in DU.
As long as the Dems keep thinking this they will be ineffective.
The American Public has repudiated all of this cr*p.
This is a legitimate post...
It's a bunch of ranting by a confused Dem.
This type of venomous claptrap didn't in anyway weaken my resolve to vote straight Republican every single chance I get...
It strengthened it.
Less of a nightmare than having the office of president disgraced, the Chinese buying our government and Janet Reno deciding who lives or dies.
"And I will never understand what or how the American people were thinking on Election Day 2002!!!!!!
Precisely the reason the Democrats lost. They are out of touch and have no idea of what "normal people" think.
"May "god" save America, "please."
Sleep well, Your prayers were answered!
That's how can I sleep peacefully at night. In the end we will all get exactly what we deserve.
And by the way welcome to The Freepers Lounge.
1. To: reaganisright (#0)I don't know what your promise was, but I do know these facts. One, New Revolution was not banned for this post. As a matter of fact, I said no to doing so when requested to on this thread. And second, despite how aged your account looks, you didn't start posting until this year. And not in any significant amount until just lately.Advise you to knock off the crap. If you continue being a pain in the butt, I will definitely ban someone, but it won't be the moderator. Thanks, Jim
Direct from JimRob. I thought maybe he was incapacitated, until I heard from him.
Thanks to your info on this board I am finding that the board I once loved is now a sham.
The "Admin Moderators" are out of control, and maybe they were paid a visit by the NSA/CIA/FBI, whatever. I worked with those guys and liked them all.
I should've kept my promise and stopped posting, it's just not worth it.
reaganisright posted on 2002-11-22 17:26:50 Reply
|
|---|
| ZOT!!!! |
Whip out another of your aged accounts. Your games simply don't work any more. People have heard the song before and no one is buying.
Let's parse this, shall we:
And I will never understand
That could be due to the fact that the American People are, by and large, not a bunch of Socialist morons that desire to have their every thought and action dictated by a Government agency comprised of idiots like yourself...
what or how the American people were thinking on Election Day 2002
Most likely due to a combination of the previous explanation and the fact that you don't think and the Amerian voters do...
When Roe v. Wade is reversed, as I hope it is, as the bad law that it is (I am a Yale Law School graduate that I think is capable of judging the matter,) the issue of abortion will only be returned to the states. I don't think anything like 80,000 women ever died annually from back alley abortions, but certainly nothing like that number will die when Roe v. Wade is reversed. The matter of abortion will be returned to the states, where it belongs constitutionally, leftist states will be left free to permit abortion, and most women wanting an abortion will be able to travel to those states. I'd be surprised if there would be anything like 80,000 women annually who cannot get an abortion when they want one, but I am certain nothing approaching that number of women will die.
By the way, I understand women die today from undergoing abortions that are legal under Roe v. Wade. What gives you any confidence that this number is smaller than the number of women that would die from back alley abortions after Roe v. Wade is reversed?
How President Bush could possibly campaign on making the tax cuts permanent and repealing the so called "death" tax to the detriment of the Social Security (which he promised not to touch) and Medicare trust funds and to the benefit to tax payers earning over $350,000 (the "truly" rich and greedy) while the deficits will stretch from here to the moon and beyond and will add billions and billions of dollars in interest payments to the budget for many, many decades to come (a ticking fiscal thermonuclear reaction waiting to happen), appointing reactionary conservative judges to the federal bench, with the rubber stamp approval of the Republican Senate, which appointments will be making critical decisions thirty years from now, a prescription drug plan formulated by the pharisaical industry, no rational plan for relief from skyrocketing health care cost and, to "add" insult to injury, presiding as President over current "cuts" to Medicare, advocating nothing that I know of regarding a patients bill of rights, and given the abysmal performance of the economy and financial markets, etc. and pick up seats in the House and Senate is far, far beyond my political comprehension!
Note: this topic is from . Thanks NR.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.