Slow Code wrote:

when you going to stop welching on your bet about my party sc you owe
100 hunderd to amsat in my name

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 22:38:32 +0000, Slow Code wrote:

None,

They complain about it being dark and wait for a republican to do it.

They accomplish this task by contracting Haliburtian to pile up dead US
solders to reach the light bulb made by GE. Due to this huge expense, they
pass more tax cuts for rich republicans so nobody (who counts) is hurt
financially. Everybody's a winner! Right?

"Barnard Peters" wrote in message
newsan.2006.10.04.05.40.06.32926@blueplanet...
On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 22:38:32 +0000, Slow Code wrote:

None,

They complain about it being dark and wait for a republican to do it.

They accomplish this task by contracting Haliburtian to pile up dead US
solders to reach the light bulb made by GE. Due to this huge expense, they
pass more tax cuts for rich republicans so nobody (who counts) is hurt
financially. Everybody's a winner! Right?
=
Heck. Maybe The Slickster and Janet could have used Halliburton to rebuild
the World Trade Center the first time it was bombed. Or, and get this...how
about if Halliburton would have rebuilt the USS Cole? Or the Marine barracks
in Lebanon?
I bet a little bit of that Halliburton money could have easily rebuilt the
Waco compound that Reno turned into a crematory...
But wait! Clinton was far too busy granting amnesty to home-grown terrorists
(get that Hillary vote) while spending monies given him from Communist
China.
And Clinton's gal, the Atty. General who advocated masturbation? Jocylen?
Didn't she go obscure right after her son was arrested for drug sales?

Oh, and not let us forget Roger Clinton, the half-brother druggie supreme
who snorted more Cocaine than a vacuum sweeper.

And last, but most importantly. 95% of the wealthiest people in this country
pay 80% of the taxes gathered. The low earners, the ones you support, pay a
pittance compared to the rich. Your claim is pure Democrat poppycock.

Barnard Peters wrote:
On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 22:38:32 +0000, Slow Code wrote:

None,

They complain about it being dark and wait for a republican to do it.

They accomplish this task by contracting Haliburtian to pile up dead US
solders to reach the light bulb made by GE. Due to this huge expense, they
pass more tax cuts for rich republicans so nobody (who counts) is hurt
financially. Everybody's a winner! Right?

BP - You post is a Classic Example of the
Liberal "All-Petered-Out Principle". ~ RHF

On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 03:59:06 -0500, "Arf! Arf!"
wrote in :


"Barnard Peters" wrote in message
newsan.2006.10.04.05.40.06.32926@blueplanet.. .
On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 22:38:32 +0000, Slow Code wrote:

None,

They complain about it being dark and wait for a republican to do it.

They accomplish this task by contracting Haliburtian to pile up dead US
solders to reach the light bulb made by GE. Due to this huge expense, they
pass more tax cuts for rich republicans so nobody (who counts) is hurt
financially. Everybody's a winner! Right?
=
Heck. Maybe The Slickster and Janet could have used Halliburton to rebuild
the World Trade Center the first time it was bombed. Or, and get this...how
about if Halliburton would have rebuilt the USS Cole? Or the Marine barracks
in Lebanon?
I bet a little bit of that Halliburton money could have easily rebuilt the
Waco compound that Reno turned into a crematory...
But wait! Clinton was far too busy granting amnesty to home-grown terrorists
(get that Hillary vote)


http://archive.salon.com/news/col/co...ons/index.html


while spending monies given him from Communist
China.


How do you think Bush is financing his war?


And Clinton's gal, the Atty. General who advocated masturbation? Jocylen?
Didn't she go obscure right after her son was arrested for drug sales?

Oh, and not let us forget Roger Clinton, the half-brother druggie supreme
who snorted more Cocaine than a vacuum sweeper.


http://www.hereinreality.com/familyvalues.html


And last, but most importantly. 95% of the wealthiest people in this country
pay 80% of the taxes gathered. The low earners, the ones you support, pay a
pittance compared to the rich.


Yeah, those taxes are really putting the pinch on the well-to-do. We
should relieve the burden on the rich by sending IRS agents out on the
streets to shake down the homeless and senior citizens, huh?


Your claim is pure Democrat poppycock.


Go blow a goat.

On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 05:46:30 -0500, "Arf! Arf!"
wrote in :




Yeah, those taxes are really putting the pinch on the well-to-do. We
should relieve the burden on the rich by sending IRS agents out on the
streets to shake down the homeless and senior citizens, huh?

The Homeless are not paying taxes. WE are paying for their medical care. We,
as in ME!


You think you are the only one? Get a clue. Supporting those who have
no means to support themselves is one of the costs of living in a
civilized society. If that concept evades your understanding, how
about a translation from the Big Dummy's Guide to Republican Values:
"We pay off the beggars so they don't become theives and steal our
****, or get restless and overthrow the politicians that we bought and
paid for with our hard-earned money."


And I dare you to show me a single instance of the IRS "shaking down" the
homeless. Name ONE instance and back it up with facts.
Show me where the IRS is attacking senior citizens.


Where did I say they did?


Seems to me it was Al
Gore who increased the taxes on Social Security...monies that our Senior
Citizens rely on to live from day to day.
It was Al Gore who placed a "fee" on everybody's phone bills and wouldn't
exempt the Seniors.


http://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html


Blow a goat? How about if you tell the truth?


I just did.

Yeah...like I'm going to waste my time following and reading your Leftista
links....

Guess agan...

Yeah, those taxes are really putting the pinch on the well-to-do. We
should relieve the burden on the rich by sending IRS agents out on the
streets to shake down the homeless and senior citizens, huh?

The Homeless are not paying taxes. WE are paying for their medical care. We,
as in ME!
And I dare you to show me a single instance of the IRS "shaking down" the
homeless. Name ONE instance and back it up with facts.
Show me where the IRS is attacking senior citizens. Seems to me it was Al
Gore who increased the taxes on Social Security...monies that our Senior
Citizens rely on to live from day to day.
It was Al Gore who placed a "fee" on everybody's phone bills and wouldn't
exempt the Seniors.

Blow a goat? How about if you tell the truth?

On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 06:45:32 -0500, "Arf! Arf!"
wrote in :


"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 05:46:30 -0500, "Arf! Arf!"
wrote in :




Yeah, those taxes are really putting the pinch on the well-to-do. We
should relieve the burden on the rich by sending IRS agents out on the
streets to shake down the homeless and senior citizens, huh?

The Homeless are not paying taxes. WE are paying for their medical care.
We,
as in ME!


You think you are the only one? Get a clue. Supporting those who have
no means to support themselves is one of the costs of living in a
civilized society. If that concept evades your understanding, how
about a translation from the Big Dummy's Guide to Republican Values:
"We pay off the beggars so they don't become theives and steal our
****, or get restless and overthrow the politicians that we bought and
paid for with our hard-earned money."


And I dare you to show me a single instance of the IRS "shaking down" the
homeless. Name ONE instance and back it up with facts.
Show me where the IRS is attacking senior citizens.


Where did I say they did?


Seems to me it was Al
Gore who increased the taxes on Social Security...monies that our Senior
Citizens rely on to live from day to day.
It was Al Gore who placed a "fee" on everybody's phone bills and wouldn't
exempt the Seniors.


http://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html


Blow a goat? How about if you tell the truth?


I just did.

"Where did I say they did?"

Well, I copied and pasted your comment that, "by sending IRS agents out on
the
streets to shake down the homeless and senior citizens"
I guess that constitutes you saying "they did".


A poor 'hack-and-attack' interpretation. Read the entire quote: "We
should relieve the burden on the rich by sending IRS agents out on the
streets to shake down the homeless and senior citizens, huh?"


I don't "need a clue" as that overused trite phrase of yours indicates.
That is what I like about Liberals. Catch phrases such as "get a clue" or,
"smell the coffee" are so easy to use.


Yes, and "poppycock" is so much more chic.


So..living in a "civilized society", according to you, requires that I
support the non-workers? The lazy? The druggies? Since when? According to
who? You?
What gives YOU the authority to tell me that I should support the lazy, the
unemployed?


I didn't invent civilization. If you want to abandon it, that's up to
you. Just remember that benefits don't come without responsibilities.


Maybe you should get a copy of The Dummies Guide of Mooching.
Liberals are all too quick to "feel sorry" for the lazy, the non-earners but
do little to help them. Oh, yeah..you want to give THEM my tax dollars...but
to what end?


I don't want to give them my tax dollars any more than you do. I would
much rather they earn their own livings and make contributions to
society like the rest of us. But not all of them are malingerers; many
of them have legitimate reasons for not being productive members of
society. The most common reasons are psychological and emotional
dysfunction, so I am very much in favor of providing mental health
treatment for anyone. That's how to attack the cause of a problem
(mental health) instead of throwing money at its effects (poverty).
Now how does that make me a liberal?


How about we turn that around in that, "We pay off the beggars so they don't
become theives and steal our ****", and we do it with more and more taxes
and handouts. Of course the beggars remain thieves, they count on the "dole"
and they will steal you and me blind, given the opportunity.

What have you solved???


I agree -- the Republican plan doesn't work.

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 05:46:30 -0500, "Arf! Arf!"
wrote in :




Yeah, those taxes are really putting the pinch on the well-to-do. We
should relieve the burden on the rich by sending IRS agents out on the
streets to shake down the homeless and senior citizens, huh?

The Homeless are not paying taxes. WE are paying for their medical care.
We,
as in ME!


You think you are the only one? Get a clue. Supporting those who have
no means to support themselves is one of the costs of living in a
civilized society. If that concept evades your understanding, how
about a translation from the Big Dummy's Guide to Republican Values:
"We pay off the beggars so they don't become theives and steal our
****, or get restless and overthrow the politicians that we bought and
paid for with our hard-earned money."


And I dare you to show me a single instance of the IRS "shaking down" the
homeless. Name ONE instance and back it up with facts.
Show me where the IRS is attacking senior citizens.


Where did I say they did?


Seems to me it was Al
Gore who increased the taxes on Social Security...monies that our Senior
Citizens rely on to live from day to day.
It was Al Gore who placed a "fee" on everybody's phone bills and wouldn't
exempt the Seniors.


http://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html


Blow a goat? How about if you tell the truth?


I just did.

"Where did I say they did?"

Well, I copied and pasted your comment that, "by sending IRS agents out on
the
streets to shake down the homeless and senior citizens"
I guess that constitutes you saying "they did".

I don't "need a clue" as that overused trite phrase of yours indicates.
That is what I like about Liberals. Catch phrases such as "get a clue" or,
"smell the coffee" are so easy to use.
So..living in a "civilized society", according to you, requires that I
support the non-workers? The lazy? The druggies? Since when? According to
who? You?
What gives YOU the authority to tell me that I should support the lazy, the
unemployed?

Maybe you should get a copy of The Dummies Guide of Mooching.
Liberals are all too quick to "feel sorry" for the lazy, the non-earners but
do little to help them. Oh, yeah..you want to give THEM my tax dollars...but
to what end?

How about we turn that around in that, "We pay off the beggars so they don't
become theives and steal our ****", and we do it with more and more taxes
and handouts. Of course the beggars remain thieves, they count on the "dole"
and they will steal you and me blind, given the opportunity.

What have you solved???