On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 19:55:44 -0500, Mr.B1ack wrote:

Ima wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 12:35:55 -0500, Mr.B1ack wrote:

wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 20:14:57 -0800 (PST), Stevie Nichts
wrote:

On Jan 22, 8:56Â*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 13:40:35 -0800 (PST), Stevie Nichts
wrote:

more like ... hmm .. "rich person".


Show me in the constitution where becoming 'rich' voids ones
citizenship and/or rights to free political speech or
speech-equivalents.

Sure is funny how the rich get all these benefits but yet feel they are
above paying taxes. They need to pay their far share. It sould hurt them
in the same way (not amount!) that it hurts the average folks.

And don't feed me the limpBALLS classic line about that the rich do pay
taxes.... most don't pay anymore then, and more then less then we do.
Proven fact

http://www.devilfinder.com
In Haiti Radios help save Lives

Article(s) also mention cell phones.But, Radios are Always
Dependable!,,, cell phones are NOT!

Damn no good lefturds and Damn no good democraps hate Radios and
Capitalism, they sure do love those turds (cell phones) though,,, I HATE
cell phones (turds), glued to ''their'' ears!

.....along the trail and they arre gonnne,,,,, Hayba lobba lobba lobba
ling ling donnnng,,,,,, 'ope the cows come back hommmme,,,,,,
cuhulin

On Jan 24, 1:56*am, Twibil wrote:
On Jan 23, 5:58*pm, pyjamarama wrote:

America hears you and rejects you out-of-hand.

Know the easiest and most accurate way to detect an extremist
fruitcake from either the left *or* right wings?

They invariably presume to speak for "America".

So the growing majorities in every major poll who
are fed up to the teeth with Obama's radical
leftist agenda are now "extremist fruitcakes",
troll-boy? LOL!

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 19:55:44 -0500, Mr.B1ack wrote:

How about the owner of the FAUX network, who is Australian and has most
of his investments in Asia. He has allot to gain from the failure of
america. Where does the $400M for Ru$h come from when his advert sales do
not support this money?

Murdoch ? He makes a lot of money selling product
in America. He doesn't want us to go broke.

BWE--HAHAHAHA

He makes money servicing dingbat conservatives who have NO fundamental
history of helping Americans.


Now certain ultra-'liberal' interests - long-time
America-haters ... would LOVE to see us crippled
so we couldn't afford any more 'imperialism'.

By "liberal american haters"---do you mean the ones who supplied the
intellectual basis for this nation, who fought conservative racism and
Segregation, abuse of the elderly, children and women for generations?

You need to read history and you'll find out that conservatism and
loonytarian bull**** has the historical onus of being the cause of our
American problems

It is you you have to read history ... todays so called liberal is in no way
comparable to the classical liberal of the Framers of the US Constitution.
I'll agree that the Framers were liberals at the time, but if you want to
compare them to todays liberals you have to compare the American Revolution
with another revolution during the same time period ... the French
Revolution. This makes the American revolution very conservative compared
to French Revolution.

Using the conservative/liberal comparison is to try and hide the
racism/segrgation of the Democratic party ... it wasn't the Repulican
presidential candidate who sat in a church with a bigot preacher for 20
years and tried to bail himself out with his 'more perfect union' speech
which he still tried to defend Rev Wright ... "I can no more disown him than
I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my
white grandmother" ... eventully Obama did chuck him under the bus ...
todays liberalism advocates dependence on the central govt, hardly the
classical liberals position of the framers of the US Constitution who
believed in limited govt with enumerated powers.

On Jan 25, 11:45*am, Rick Saunders wrote:


America hears you and rejects you out-of-hand.

Know the easiest and most accurate way to detect an extremist
fruitcake from either the left *or* right wings?

They invariably presume to speak for "America".

So the growing majorities in every major poll who
are fed up to the teeth with Obama's radical
leftist agenda are now "extremist fruitcakes",
troll-boy?

Whoops! Reading comprehension (1) *and* non-sequitur (2) problems!

1. Nobody said that except you. Writing your own text and attributing
it to someone else has a name: "Straw Man Argument". And it's not a
compliment. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man )

2. This is what happens when a fruitloop chooses his (?) reply without
reference to whether or not it fits.

See below for a second example.

LOL!

Ya see, it's generally inappropriate to pretend laughter after you've
just shot yourself in the foot.

On 1/25/10 14:52 , wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 10:23:52 -0600, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:

On 1/25/10 10:12 , wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:36:28 -0600, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:




Where does the $400M for Ru$h come from when his advert sales do
not support this money?


Advertising on Rush's show isn't cheap. There's a LOT of money in
advertising, alone. But stations also pay a carriage fee for running
the show. These fees, and advertising, easily cover Rush's personal
compensation and bonuses as well as profits for his syndicator.

Then, there's his website, also advertising supported, with a
subscription base for access to premium content, as well as his
newsletter.

There's nothing sinister going on in the way Rush is paid.

Well, it's like the old saying says: You can fool some of the people
some of the time---but a conservative only needs to be fed compliments
and legitimize their beliefs and their happy as clams.


Yes, because only Conservatives are naive.



Must be some reason why an entire belief system would oppose nearly
all modern change for the better, like voting rights, civil rights,
womens rights, childrens rights....and fight viciously for policies,
ideas and socially failed beliefs so hard.


Check your history. Voting rights, civil rights, women's rights
and childrens rights were all passed by Republican majorities, while
Democrats fought viciously fought them.

Start with the Civil Rights act of 1964. That'll keep you
occupied for a while.

On 1/25/10 14:56 , wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 18:14:13 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

And don't feed me the limpBALLS classic line about that the rich do pay
taxes.... most don't pay anymore then, and more then less then we do.
Proven fact

TOo true

The "they pay most of the taxes" is a false claim, misdirection, and
totally stupid way of trying to deflect the core principles



According to the IRS:


86% of all Federal Income Taxes are paid by the top 25% of income
earners.

97% of all Federal Income Taxes are paid by the top 50% of income
earners.

50% of all Federal Income Taxes are paid by the top 1% of income
earners.



From the Wall Street Journal:

"Notably, however, the share of taxes paid by the top 1% has kept
climbing this decade -- to 39.4% in 2005, from 37.4% in 2000. The
share paid by the top 5% has increased even more rapidly. In other
words, despite the tax reductions of 2001 and 2003, the rich saw
their share of taxes paid rise at a faster rate than their share of
income.

On 1/25/10 19:43 , wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:59:19 -0600, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:

Must be some reason why an entire belief system would oppose nearly
all modern change for the better, like voting rights, civil rights,
womens rights, childrens rights....and fight viciously for policies,
ideas and socially failed beliefs so hard.


Check your history. Voting rights, civil rights, women's rights
and childrens rights were all passed by Republican majorities, while
Democrats fought viciously fought them.

Start with the Civil Rights act of 1964. That'll keep you
occupied for a while.


Christ, whatta doofus

First of all, Party label doesn't qualify for the issue

The IDEOLOGY of (whatever) party is the issue---CONSERVATIVES fought
EVERY major innovation, policy and law elevating peoples civil rights
and liberties from the inception of this nation thru today.


Again, check your history. Y'all is wrong.

On 1/25/10 19:48 , wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:08:23 -0600, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:

On 1/25/10 14:56 , wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 18:14:13 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

And don't feed me the limpBALLS classic line about that the rich do pay
taxes.... most don't pay anymore then, and more then less then we do.
Proven fact

TOo true

The "they pay most of the taxes" is a false claim, misdirection, and
totally stupid way of trying to deflect the core principles



According to the IRS:


86% of all Federal Income Taxes are paid by the top 25% of income
earners.

97% of all Federal Income Taxes are paid by the top 50% of income
earners.

50% of all Federal Income Taxes are paid by the top 1% of income
earners.



From the Wall Street Journal:

"Notably, however, the share of taxes paid by the top 1% has kept
climbing this decade -- to 39.4% in 2005, from 37.4% in 2000. The
share paid by the top 5% has increased even more rapidly. In other
words, despite the tax reductions of 2001 and 2003, the rich saw
their share of taxes paid rise at a faster rate than their share of
income.


THe taxes they pay are miniscule related to the amount they make.


So what?



Since they own 80% of all the wealth--I'd say they're getting off
cheap.

Thankfully, what you say isn't incumbent on the rest of us.

US to lift 21 year ban on Haggis.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/t-news/2436912/posts

Those Queers who banned Haggis don't know sh.t!!!

HAGGIS! HAGGIS! HAGGIS!
cuhulin, the HAGGIS