Jump to content

New Facebook Pages

Ford Mach E

Ford Thunder

  • Custom Search


Sign in to follow this  
Mark B. Morrow

Sarah Palin

Recommended Posts

Never said I hate rich people. Thats your conclusion, based on no evidence.

 

I'm just basing it on what you said Len.

 

Go take your head out of your ass. Most working people, white collar and blue collar alike, could give a fuck about the "tax burden" of the wealthiest 1/2% of the population. Back in 2001, McCain ripped on Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy. Now he has his right wing minions like your sorry ass being apologists and excuse-makers for the wealthy. Let them trickle down on your head. If they can afford the higher "tax burden", then G*d damn it, they should pay it and shut the fuck up. The bedrock principle of the graduated income tax system.

 

That statement from you doesn't sound to me like a hold hands, get along and let's play fair kind of mindset. Sounded to me like you "could give a fuck about tthe tax burden of the wealthiest 1/2% of the population."

 

You gotta remember where you came from before you declare where you're going Len.

 

Second point.

 

Call it the trappings of a Jesuit education, but I still believe, and will always believe, that in a civilized society, in the principles that JFK quoted the Bible on (Luke 12:48) "For of those to whom much is given, much is required"

 

I always find it funny that liberals will quote the Bible and good God fearing principles when it suits their agenda and the rest of the time they work feverishly to destroy religion in this country. I'm not saying that's you Len, but your good liberal buddy Edstock certainly is the text book example of "no place for religion on government" type. Now all of a sudden we should be adhering to the teachings of Luke when it comes to taxation.

 

Why is it the governments responsiblity to make sure that the wealthy look out for the poorest and weakest among us? Espeically when you are basing that assumption on a religous context. If you are going to put forth the argument that the wealthy should pay more because it's in the Bible then why not take the next step? Why not return the pledge of allegiance to the schools? Why not afford Christian students the right to prayer in school? Why not enforce the edicts of pro-life? Why not declare Sundays a national day of worship? You can't pick and choose which religious aspects of the Bible you want to apply to government and shun the others Len. If you do then you aren't really doing it out of religion as much as out of your need to have an excuse to back up your agenda. Which is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The rich do better when everyone does better. It doesn't necessarily work in the opposite direction.

 

That sums it up...of course if the rich encounter problems with risky Mortgage leveraging then the burden of bailing them out falls on all of us. Capitalism is all good and well when we have profits and gains...when the bottom falls out we might want to tweak it with a smidgen of Socialism. Nice to see the democratic administration in power recognizes this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm just basing it on what you said Len.

 

 

 

That statement from you doesn't sound to me like a hold hands, get along and let's play fair kind of mindset. Sounded to me like you "could give a fuck about tthe tax burden of the wealthiest 1/2% of the population."

 

You gotta remember where you came from before you declare where you're going Len.

 

Second point.

 

 

 

I always find it funny that liberals will quote the Bible and good God fearing principles when it suits their agenda and the rest of the time they work feverishly to destroy religion in this country. I'm not saying that's you Len, but your good liberal buddy Edstock certainly is the text book example of "no place for religion on government" type. Now all of a sudden we should be adhering to the teachings of Luke when it comes to taxation.

 

Why is it the governments responsiblity to make sure that the wealthy look out for the poorest and weakest among us? Espeically when you are basing that assumption on a religous context. If you are going to put forth the argument that the wealthy should pay more because it's in the Bible then why not take the next step? Why not return the pledge of allegiance to the schools? Why not afford Christian students the right to prayer in school? Why not enforce the edicts of pro-life? Why not declare Sundays a national day of worship? You can't pick and choose which religious aspects of the Bible you want to apply to government and shun the others Len. If you do then you aren't really doing it out of religion as much as out of your need to have an excuse to back up your agenda. Which is it?

 

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm just basing it on what you said Len.

 

 

 

That statement from you doesn't sound to me like a hold hands, get along and let's play fair kind of mindset. Sounded to me like you "could give a fuck about tthe tax burden of the wealthiest 1/2% of the population."

 

You gotta remember where you came from before you declare where you're going Len.

 

Second point.

 

 

 

I always find it funny that liberals will quote the Bible and good God fearing principles when it suits their agenda and the rest of the time they work feverishly to destroy religion in this country. I'm not saying that's you Len, but your good liberal buddy Edstock certainly is the text book example of "no place for religion on government" type. Now all of a sudden we should be adhering to the teachings of Luke when it comes to taxation.

 

Why is it the governments responsiblity to make sure that the wealthy look out for the poorest and weakest among us? Espeically when you are basing that assumption on a religous context. If you are going to put forth the argument that the wealthy should pay more because it's in the Bible then why not take the next step? Why not return the pledge of allegiance to the schools? Why not afford Christian students the right to prayer in school? Why not enforce the edicts of pro-life? Why not declare Sundays a national day of worship? You can't pick and choose which religious aspects of the Bible you want to apply to government and shun the others Len. If you do then you aren't really doing it out of religion as much as out of your need to have an excuse to back up your agenda. Which is it?

 

I don't consider myself hostile to others practising their religon. I do object to being forced to observe religious edicts I don't subscribe to. Government belonmgs to all and should not choose sides. Jefferson's Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom provided:

 

no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Stat...ligious_Freedom

 

Jefferson also believed in the right to have no faith at all:

 

Regarding the choice of some governments to regulate religion and thought, Jefferson stated:

 

“ The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.[54]

 

Jefferson sought what he called a "wall of separation between Church and State," which he believed was a principle expressed by the First Amendment. This phrase has been cited several times by the Supreme Court in its interpretation of the Establishment Clause.

In an 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, he wrote:

 

“ Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between church and State.[53] ”

 

 

 

I think you are confusing the free expression of religon with some right to force others to share in your chosen religious exercise. No one is prohibited from praying in public schools. They are prohibited from making prayer a part of the curriculem. You are free to pray all you want. Ever show up for a pop quiz unprepared?

 

I have never understood why those who want prayer in the schools believe it only works if everyone does it together. Go ahead and pray just leave me out of it.

 

You do realize that the Pledge of Allegience didn't have the words "Under God" until 1954 don't you? I have no problem with the Pledge we said it when I was in grade school in the '60s.

 

No one is prohibiting you from exercising your Pro-Life beliefs. If you don't believe in abortion don't have one. I could see your argument if we were in China where abortion is coerced by the government but it isn't here. Not everyone holds your religious views. Even some who are Pro-Life make exceptions for rape or incest. Again do what you want, you can even freely exercise your roights of free speech to convince others that you are right. Leave those who don't share your religious views alone.

Edited by Mark B. Morrow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you are confusing the free expression of religon with some right to force others to share in your chosen religious exercise. No one is prohibited from praying in public schools. They are prohibited from making prayer a part of the curriculem. You are free to pray all you want. Ever show up for a pop quiz unprepared?

 

I have never understood why those who want prayer in the schools believe it only works if everyone does it together. Go ahead and pray just leave me out of it.

 

You do realize that the Pledge of Allegience didn't have the words "Under God" until 1954 don't you? I have no problem with the Pledge we said it when I was in grade school in the '60s.

 

No one is prohibiting you from exercising your Pro-Life beliefs. If you don't believe in abortion don't have one. I could see your argument if we were in China where abortion is coerced by the government but it isn't here. Not everyone holds your religious views. Even some who are Pro-Life make exceptions for rape or incest. Again do what you want, you can even freely exercise your roights of free speech to convince others that you are right. Leave those who don't share your religious views alone.

 

 

What in the hell are you talking to me for dumb ass? I'm not the one that suggested that rich people should pay more taxes because it's in the Bible in the book of Luke. I couldn't care less if kids pray in schools and I happen to be pro-choice. I brought those up as examples dipshit. Don't waste your Thomas Jefferson lecture on me, I've probably forgotten more about the man than you'll ever know. You need to be posting to your little liberal buddy LenA. My God you guys are dumb as hell sometimes.

Edited by BlackHorse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm just basing it on what you said Len.

 

 

 

That statement from you doesn't sound to me like a hold hands, get along and let's play fair kind of mindset. Sounded to me like you "could give a fuck about the tax burden of the wealthiest 1/2% of the population."

 

You gotta remember where you came from before you declare where you're going Len.

 

Second point.

 

 

 

I always find it funny that liberals will quote the Bible and good God fearing principles when it suits their agenda and the rest of the time they work feverishly to destroy religion in this country. I'm not saying that's you Len, but your good liberal buddy Edstock certainly is the text book example of "no place for religion on government" type. Now all of a sudden we should be adhering to the teachings of Luke when it comes to taxation.

 

Why is it the governments responsiblity to make sure that the wealthy look out for the poorest and weakest among us? Espeically when you are basing that assumption on a religous context. If you are going to put forth the argument that the wealthy should pay more because it's in the Bible then why not take the next step? Why not return the pledge of allegiance to the schools? Why not afford Christian students the right to prayer in school? Why not enforce the edicts of pro-life? Why not declare Sundays a national day of worship? You can't pick and choose which religious aspects of the Bible you want to apply to government and shun the others Len. If you do then you aren't really doing it out of religion as much as out of your need to have an excuse to back up your agenda. Which is it?

I honestly am not concerned about the tax burdens of the wealthiest 1/2% of the population. That doesn't mean I'm hostile to them, and even if I have aspirations to be rich one day, it doesn't mean I'm going to kiss either their posteriors, or their rings. Fictitious characters like Gordon Greko are not my heroes. If there are those among the wealthy I do adnire, although not always agree with, it's guys like Warren Buffett.

 

Why is it the government's responsibility to look out for the to make sure that the wealthy look out for the poorest and weakest among us? I'm not certain the government is making the wealthy look out for the poorest and weakest, but I guess they're being forced to foot a good chunk of the bill, and that's the government's job. It's the government's responsibility to ensure that a civilized society balances out self interest with helping the poorest and the weakest. Bush 41's thousand points of lights and Dubya's compassionate conservatism are all well and good, but there has to be a minimum safety net established and paid for, and for one reason and one reason alone - because it's the right thing to do. Period. Not because of religion - I'm no longer that religious - but my lack of being religious doesn't negate the validity of the principle.

 

As to the rest of your post, Mark B. Morrow answered you far more eloquently than I could, and I defer to his post, and concur with all of it. My major problem with the religious right, and one of the things that's affected my beliefs, is that there is a tendency to believe that the existence in society of something they don't agree with, that it's somehow a violation of their rights. Again, Mark B. Morrow said it better than I could, and his answer to you is my answer to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What in the hell are you talking to me for dumb ass? I'm not the one that suggested that rich people should pay more taxes because it's in the Bible in the book of Luke. I couldn't care less if kids pray in schools and I happen to be pro-choice. I brought those up as examples dipshit. Don't waste your Thomas Jefferson lecture on me, I've probably forgotten more about the man than you'll ever know. You need to be posting to your little liberal buddy LenA. My God you guys are dumb as hell sometimes.

wow...pedestal is getting taller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wow...pedestal is getting taller

 

LOL, I have to admit that one got me fired up. The only one so far that has. Hey sorry Mark, I'm sure you're not a dumb person but sheesh, it seemed to me the point I was making to Len was so obvious. You can't base a taxation policy on some religious belief. There's a little thing called separation of Church and State. That's why I poiinted out that if you're going to tax the rich with the mother load because the Bible says so then you leave yourself open for a whole lot of other applications of law and such based on religon. I don't know how one gets to the point of view that the graduated tax system is fair because Luke says so. Seriously Mark, go have a talk with your pal Len. I'm not the one you need to concern yourself with.

 

As for you Deanh. Would you please, please, dear God get a grammar book and read it. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LOL, I have to admit that one got me fired up. The only one so far that has. Hey sorry Mark, I'm sure you're not a dumb person but sheesh, it seemed to me the point I was making to Len was so obvious. You can't base a taxation policy on some religious belief. There's a little thing called separation of Church and State. That's why I poiinted out that if you're going to tax the rich with the mother load because the Bible says so then you leave yourself open for a whole lot of other applications of law and such based on religon. I don't know how one gets to the point of view that the graduated tax system is fair because Luke says so. Seriously Mark, go have a talk with your pal Len. I'm not the one you need to concern yourself with.

 

As for you Deanh. Would you please, please, dear God get a grammar book and read it. LOL

OK Mr Keats....nuttin wrong w dat grammar oh Holy one.....just for Gods sake take a chill pill....at the first sign of someone questioning your beliefs it becomes like a kids tantrum ....one can make a point without screaming at the top of ones voice....and please, correct my grammar anytime you consider yours to be perfect..... :shades:

Edited by Deanh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If there are those among the wealthy I do adnire, although not always agree with, it's guys like Warren Buffett.

 

Warren Buffet? Really?

 

Buffalo is a city awash in subsidized projects. Warren Buffet, who owns the Buffalo News, got $100 million in government giveaways to open a call center for his GEICO General Insurance Company, the one that uses cavemen and a talking lizard to pitch its products. A special subsidy zone had to be created just to lavish the money on Buffet. The call center cost $40 million. So, basically, Buffett's company is getting back what it invested and the collecting a $60 million gift from state and local taxpayers. The caller center may eventually create 2,500 jobs. If that happens the subsidy would equal $40,000 per job, which is more than a year's pay and benefits for each of the call center workers.

 

http://www.bobsgear.com/display/garnet/Fre...ernment+Expense

 

 

Buffett is exactly the kind of wealthy person you should find disgusting. Do you even research the stuff you believe in Len? Or do you just let someone else tell it to you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK Mr Keats....nuttin wrong w dat grammar oh Holy one.....just for Gods sake take a chill pill....at the first sign of someone questioning your beliefs it becomes like a kids tantrum ....one can make a point without screaming at the top of ones voice....and please, correct my grammar anytime you consider yours to be perfect..... :shades:

 

Dude none of this stuff makes me angry. I can't help it if you get that impression but in this whole thread the only post that got me a little fired up was that last one from Mark because I thought my point was so obvious and he was just like "duh I don't get it."

 

Why are you so worried about it anyway? My grammar may not be perfect because this is just a forum and I'm not worrying about it. But compared to yours I'm practically a literary giant. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude none of this stuff makes me angry. I can't help it if you get that impression but in this whole thread the only post that got me a little fired up was that last one from Mark because I thought my point was so obvious and he was just like "duh I don't get it."

 

Why are you so worried about it anyway? My grammar may not be perfect because this is just a forum and I'm not worrying about it. But compared to yours I'm practically a literary giant. lol

need a ladder to get up on that pedestal B-man?....sure seems like it....do us ALL a favor...check the ego and judmental bi-polar B at the door....one makes for some obviously well informed , albeit highly bias, educated reading....the psycho on the other hand takes glee in cussing, name calling tantrums and actions more associated with rebelious pimple popping teen years.....as you state...this is just a forum.....you know NOTHING of those you throw condescending jabs at.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
need a ladder to get up on that pedestal B-man?....sure seems like it....do us ALL a favor...check the ego and judmental bi-polar B at the door....one makes for some obviously well informed , albeit highly bias, educated reading....the psycho on the other hand takes glee in cussing, name calling tantrums and actions more associated with rebelious pimple popping teen years.....as you state...this is just a forum.....you know NOTHING of those you throw condescending jabs at.....

 

Ok, whatever dean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, whatever dean.

cool...PEACE....now back to your diatribe...beyond me, but facinatingly convoluted...but everyone seems to have valid points/ arguments......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Warren Buffet? Really?

 

 

 

http://www.bobsgear.com/display/garnet/Fre...ernment+Expense

 

 

Buffett is exactly the kind of wealthy person you should find disgusting. Do you even research the stuff you believe in Len? Or do you just let someone else tell it to you?

Doesn't bother me, but then again, I live in the Detroit area. I guess I'm accustom to big companies getting tax breaks, tax abatements, etc as an enticement (read that bribe) to locate/create some jobs. This evenings local news, here in the Metro Detroit area, was how GM is jockeying for a fifty year, 100% tax abatement to put 100 Chevy Volt powertrain components job in Bay City. The book your link refers to sounds interesting. Edited by Len_A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What in the hell are you talking to me for dumb ass? I'm not the one that suggested that rich people should pay more taxes because it's in the Bible in the book of Luke. I couldn't care less if kids pray in schools and I happen to be pro-choice. I brought those up as examples dipshit. Don't waste your Thomas Jefferson lecture on me, I've probably forgotten more about the man than you'll ever know. You need to be posting to your little liberal buddy LenA. My God you guys are dumb as hell sometimes.

 

 

Why so angry BlackHorse? I thought conservatives were supposed to be happy. I'm sorry I misconstrued your examples. If you don't want to play anymore I'll understand. I doubt you have forgotten more about Jefferson than I ever knew. I wrote my Law School Constitutional Law thesis on him and Madison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BlackHorse, man you should really give up and get a life, man seriously your going to blow a gasket one thing about it you are devoted to these Palin threads and if your married does your wife know about this other woman.

 

Who posted in: Sarah Palin

Poster Posts

BlackHorse 44

Deanh 25

Mark B. Morrow 25

RangerM 19

Len_A 16

napfirst 11

Edstock 10

fmccap 10

Ford-150 10

Pioneer 7

xr7g428 7

methos 3

RaZor 3

sprinter 3

stephenhawkings 3

Hemiman 2

Ron W. 2

theripper 2

suv_guy_19 2

DUCKRACER 2

4rd4life 2

mulewright 1

Floyd Lawson 1

falcon lover 1

retro-man 1

Ford Jellymoulds 1

Ralph Greene 1

AAISkinsFan 1

mettech 1

 

Who posted in: Palin bandwagoneers

Poster Posts

BlackHorse 24

fmccap 13

theripper 9

Raws41900 9

Deanh 9

RaZor 9

4rd4life 8

jerseyshore 7

Imawhosure 7

Mark B. Morrow 6

RangerM 6

retro-man 5

napfirst 5

Edstock 5

Hemiman 4

suv_guy_19 4

truckster 3

AAISkinsFan 3

StrangeHighways 3

Ron W. 2

Indy 2

local400future 2

timmm55 2

sprinter 2

DUCKRACER 1

Emigh 1

daytrader millionaire 1

taxman100 1

Ford-150 1

matthewq4b 1

goinbroke2 1

Pioneer 1

whatunion? 1

Bill S SRP 1

CSMJ 1

stephenhawkings 1

SheetMetalJoe 1

badfinger 1

Edited by 4rd4life

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlackHorse, man you should really give up and get a life, man seriously your going to blow a gasket one thing about it you are devoted to these Palin threads and if your married does your wife know about this other woman.

 

Who posted in: Sarah Palin

Poster Posts

BlackHorse 44

Deanh 25

Mark B. Morrow 25

RangerM 19

Len_A 16

napfirst 11

Edstock 10

fmccap 10

Ford-150 10

Pioneer 7

xr7g428 7

methos 3

RaZor 3

sprinter 3

stephenhawkings 3

Hemiman 2

Ron W. 2

theripper 2

suv_guy_19 2

DUCKRACER 2

4rd4life 2

mulewright 1

Floyd Lawson 1

falcon lover 1

retro-man 1

Ford Jellymoulds 1

Ralph Greene 1

AAISkinsFan 1

mettech 1

 

Who posted in: Palin bandwagoneers

Poster Posts

BlackHorse 24

fmccap 13

theripper 9

Raws41900 9

Deanh 9

RaZor 9

4rd4life 8

jerseyshore 7

Imawhosure 7

Mark B. Morrow 6

RangerM 6

retro-man 5

napfirst 5

Edstock 5

Hemiman 4

suv_guy_19 4

truckster 3

AAISkinsFan 3

StrangeHighways 3

Ron W. 2

Indy 2

local400future 2

timmm55 2

sprinter 2

DUCKRACER 1

Emigh 1

daytrader millionaire 1

taxman100 1

Ford-150 1

matthewq4b 1

goinbroke2 1

Pioneer 1

whatunion? 1

Bill S SRP 1

CSMJ 1

stephenhawkings 1

SheetMetalJoe 1

badfinger 1

That's pretty bold of you to tell him he needs to get a life.... can you give me the score of all the Braves games this year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's pretty bold of you to tell him he needs to get a life.... can you give me the score of all the Braves games this year?
And I can't believe I only did 16 posts (17 now)!! I could have swore it was more; sure felt like more!! LOL!!! Oh well, back to more productive uses of my time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's pretty bold of you to tell him he needs to get a life.... can you give me the score of all the Braves games this year?

 

What does the Braves have to do with this, I have no idea when, where, or who they play let alone the score of any game they play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And I can't believe I only did 16 posts (17 now)!! I could have swore it was more; sure felt like more!! LOL!!! Oh well, back to more productive uses of my time.

It was a great insight into how some minds work.

 

It seems that anger is a constant in a lot of conservatives. They are always angry; the focus changes, but the attitude continues. They are so angry that they will support policies that are not in their self-interest, which angers some even more.

 

This isn't engaging in name-calling, just trying to understand the motivation behind the abusive vitriol and the logic presented.

 

It might be something like being an intense sports fan, and finding that your team are a bunch of narcotics dealers, or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
so deos blackhorse have the hots for palin?

i mean come on 12 pages of the beauty queen and no bikini shots yet?

Only the fake bikini shot (with pellet gun) exists, but since you asked.....

Palin1.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I leave and all this off-topic crap drums up again?

 

No more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×