Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
The repubs have been in the white house for the majority of the last 50
years why has nothing been done even Reagan didn't touch it Nobody would touch it...unless the whole legislative branch had term limits..or something like that. John A. Chiara SOS Recording Studio Live Sound Inc. Albany, NY www.sosrecording.net 518-449-1637 |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
The repubs have been in the white house for the majority of the last 50
years why has nothing been done even Reagan didn't touch it Nobody would touch it...unless the whole legislative branch had term limits..or something like that. John A. Chiara SOS Recording Studio Live Sound Inc. Albany, NY www.sosrecording.net 518-449-1637 |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Once again, which party is the perennial champions of this egregious Ponzi
scheme? GeoSynch Cross posts removed until you can limit your response to just one group you do not deserve any further attention G Aw..c'mon George..answer the question..it's a good one. You are gonna not respond because of someone's posting habits? John A. Chiara SOS Recording Studio Live Sound Inc. Albany, NY www.sosrecording.net 518-449-1637 |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Once again, which party is the perennial champions of this egregious Ponzi
scheme? GeoSynch Cross posts removed until you can limit your response to just one group you do not deserve any further attention G Aw..c'mon George..answer the question..it's a good one. You are gonna not respond because of someone's posting habits? John A. Chiara SOS Recording Studio Live Sound Inc. Albany, NY www.sosrecording.net 518-449-1637 |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Blind Joni wrote:
The repubs have been in the white house for the majority of the last 50 years why has nothing been done even Reagan didn't touch it Nobody would touch it...unless the whole legislative branch had term limits..or something like that. that is my pointmore than enough blame to go around on this one as far as I can remember I have not voted for any new deal democrats G |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Blind Joni wrote:
The repubs have been in the white house for the majority of the last 50 years why has nothing been done even Reagan didn't touch it Nobody would touch it...unless the whole legislative branch had term limits..or something like that. that is my pointmore than enough blame to go around on this one as far as I can remember I have not voted for any new deal democrats G |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
"GeoSynch" wrote in message George Gleason wrote: We simple want to pay for what we do not dump the burden on our children my unborn grandchildren will be doing without to pay down GW's spending spree Then justify that bloated Democratic sacred cow known as Social Security, the greatest Ponzi scheme ever concocted by those socialist Democrats. Excuse the Democrats for actually trying to help people while the Republicans are super busy covering their own hides. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp..._on_go_co/dela y |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
"GeoSynch" wrote in message George Gleason wrote: We simple want to pay for what we do not dump the burden on our children my unborn grandchildren will be doing without to pay down GW's spending spree Then justify that bloated Democratic sacred cow known as Social Security, the greatest Ponzi scheme ever concocted by those socialist Democrats. Excuse the Democrats for actually trying to help people while the Republicans are super busy covering their own hides. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp..._on_go_co/dela y |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
"GeoSynch" wrote in message link.net...
George Gleason feigns disingenuousness: We simple want to pay for what we do not dump the burden on our children my unborn grandchildren will be doing without to pay down GW's spending spree Then justify that bloated Democratic sacred cow known as Social Security, the greatest Ponzi scheme ever concocted by those socialist Democrats. The repubs have been in the white house for the majority of the last 50 years why has nothing been done even Reagan didn't touch it And whenever election time rolls around, which party invariably attempts to scare senior citizens with the old canard 'they're going to take your Social Security benefits away'? Reality-check time, George: is Social Security a massive, forced wealth-redistribution from current and future contributors to retirees with little to no fiduciary guarantee that said contributors will receive the principal back let alone normal interest on that investment? Once again, which party is the perennial champions of this egregious Ponzi scheme? GeoSynch As opposed to investing in such great Republican Ponzi scemes like the Savings & Loans, Enron, etc. |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
"GeoSynch" wrote in message link.net...
George Gleason feigns disingenuousness: We simple want to pay for what we do not dump the burden on our children my unborn grandchildren will be doing without to pay down GW's spending spree Then justify that bloated Democratic sacred cow known as Social Security, the greatest Ponzi scheme ever concocted by those socialist Democrats. The repubs have been in the white house for the majority of the last 50 years why has nothing been done even Reagan didn't touch it And whenever election time rolls around, which party invariably attempts to scare senior citizens with the old canard 'they're going to take your Social Security benefits away'? Reality-check time, George: is Social Security a massive, forced wealth-redistribution from current and future contributors to retirees with little to no fiduciary guarantee that said contributors will receive the principal back let alone normal interest on that investment? Once again, which party is the perennial champions of this egregious Ponzi scheme? GeoSynch As opposed to investing in such great Republican Ponzi scemes like the Savings & Loans, Enron, etc. |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
As opposed to investing in such great Republican Ponzi scemes like the Savings & Loans, Enron, etc. Aren't these voluntary? John A. Chiara SOS Recording Studio Live Sound Inc. Albany, NY www.sosrecording.net 518-449-1637 |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
As opposed to investing in such great Republican Ponzi scemes like the Savings & Loans, Enron, etc. Aren't these voluntary? John A. Chiara SOS Recording Studio Live Sound Inc. Albany, NY www.sosrecording.net 518-449-1637 |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Blind Joni wrote:
As opposed to investing in such great Republican Ponzi scemes like the Savings & Loans, Enron, etc. Aren't these voluntary? I was never given the option to opt out of corporate welfare were you? G |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Blind Joni wrote:
As opposed to investing in such great Republican Ponzi scemes like the Savings & Loans, Enron, etc. Aren't these voluntary? I was never given the option to opt out of corporate welfare were you? G |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
play-on wrote: On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:53:04 GMT, Joseph Oberlander wrote: Clyde Slick wrote: But, gosh darn it, it's the truth. Refuse to pay your taxes this year. Watch the IRS take your home by force. We are what we fought to gain independance from. We didn't fight to become independent of government. The revolutionary effort itself was financed by the break away colonies taxing its inhabitants. And yet we are taxed HOW MUCH MORE than back then, even adjusted for income/inflation? We have a hell of a lot more than we did back then too. Are you planning to pave your own roads, maintain your local civic infrastructure, deliver your own mail, be your own fire and police deptartment, and fight your very own "war on terror"? The last three, certainly. |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
play-on wrote: On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:53:04 GMT, Joseph Oberlander wrote: Clyde Slick wrote: But, gosh darn it, it's the truth. Refuse to pay your taxes this year. Watch the IRS take your home by force. We are what we fought to gain independance from. We didn't fight to become independent of government. The revolutionary effort itself was financed by the break away colonies taxing its inhabitants. And yet we are taxed HOW MUCH MORE than back then, even adjusted for income/inflation? We have a hell of a lot more than we did back then too. Are you planning to pave your own roads, maintain your local civic infrastructure, deliver your own mail, be your own fire and police deptartment, and fight your very own "war on terror"? The last three, certainly. |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
George Gleason wrote: GeoSynch wrote: George Gleason wrote: We simple want to pay for what we do not dump the burden on our children my unborn grandchildren will be doing without to pay down GW's spending spree Then justify that bloated Democratic sacred cow known as Social Security, the greatest Ponzi scheme ever concocted by those socialist Democrats. GeoSynch The repubs have been in the white house for the majority of the last 50 years why has nothing been done even Reagan didn't touch it I love to bring this up. In fact, Carter and Clinton did more to try to help the working person than most of them, but they were all but pacifists, so they aren't your typical "politician". Excluding Clinton and Carter, you get exactly how many Democrats in the last 50 years? |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
George Gleason wrote: GeoSynch wrote: George Gleason wrote: We simple want to pay for what we do not dump the burden on our children my unborn grandchildren will be doing without to pay down GW's spending spree Then justify that bloated Democratic sacred cow known as Social Security, the greatest Ponzi scheme ever concocted by those socialist Democrats. GeoSynch The repubs have been in the white house for the majority of the last 50 years why has nothing been done even Reagan didn't touch it I love to bring this up. In fact, Carter and Clinton did more to try to help the working person than most of them, but they were all but pacifists, so they aren't your typical "politician". Excluding Clinton and Carter, you get exactly how many Democrats in the last 50 years? |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Joseph Oberlander wrote:
George Gleason wrote: GeoSynch wrote: George Gleason wrote: We simple want to pay for what we do not dump the burden on our children my unborn grandchildren will be doing without to pay down GW's spending spree Then justify that bloated Democratic sacred cow known as Social Security, the greatest Ponzi scheme ever concocted by those socialist Democrats. GeoSynch The repubs have been in the white house for the majority of the last 50 years why has nothing been done even Reagan didn't touch it I love to bring this up. In fact, Carter and Clinton did more to try to help the working person than most of them, but they were all but pacifists, so they aren't your typical "politician". Excluding Clinton and Carter, you get exactly how many Democrats in the last 50 years? 34 Dwight David Eisenhower, 1953-61 (Republican) 35 John Fitzgerald Kennedy, 1961-63 (Democrat) 36 Lyndon Baines Johnson, 1963-69 (Democrat) 37 Richard Milhous Nixon, 1969-74 (Republican) 38 Gerald Rudolph Ford Jr , 1974-77 (Republican) 40 Ronald Wilson Reagan, 1981-89 (Republican) 41 George Herbert Walker Bush, 1989-1993 (Republican) 43 George W. Bush, 2001- (Republican) Carter and Clinton excluded as per your request cross posts removed G |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Joseph Oberlander wrote:
George Gleason wrote: GeoSynch wrote: George Gleason wrote: We simple want to pay for what we do not dump the burden on our children my unborn grandchildren will be doing without to pay down GW's spending spree Then justify that bloated Democratic sacred cow known as Social Security, the greatest Ponzi scheme ever concocted by those socialist Democrats. GeoSynch The repubs have been in the white house for the majority of the last 50 years why has nothing been done even Reagan didn't touch it I love to bring this up. In fact, Carter and Clinton did more to try to help the working person than most of them, but they were all but pacifists, so they aren't your typical "politician". Excluding Clinton and Carter, you get exactly how many Democrats in the last 50 years? 34 Dwight David Eisenhower, 1953-61 (Republican) 35 John Fitzgerald Kennedy, 1961-63 (Democrat) 36 Lyndon Baines Johnson, 1963-69 (Democrat) 37 Richard Milhous Nixon, 1969-74 (Republican) 38 Gerald Rudolph Ford Jr , 1974-77 (Republican) 40 Ronald Wilson Reagan, 1981-89 (Republican) 41 George Herbert Walker Bush, 1989-1993 (Republican) 43 George W. Bush, 2001- (Republican) Carter and Clinton excluded as per your request cross posts removed G |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message ink.net... We have a hell of a lot more than we did back then too. Are you planning to pave your own roads, maintain your local civic infrastructure, deliver your own mail, be your own fire and police deptartment, and fight your very own "war on terror"? The last three, certainly. You are planning to deliver your own mail, be your own police and fire fighting departments and fight the war on terror all by yourself ???? I guess that means you won't have any time to be posting here any more. When will this commence? |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message ink.net... We have a hell of a lot more than we did back then too. Are you planning to pave your own roads, maintain your local civic infrastructure, deliver your own mail, be your own fire and police deptartment, and fight your very own "war on terror"? The last three, certainly. You are planning to deliver your own mail, be your own police and fire fighting departments and fight the war on terror all by yourself ???? I guess that means you won't have any time to be posting here any more. When will this commence? |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
Clyde Slick wrote: "Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message ink.net... We have a hell of a lot more than we did back then too. Are you planning to pave your own roads, maintain your local civic infrastructure, deliver your own mail, be your own fire and police deptartment, and fight your very own "war on terror"? The last three, certainly. You are planning to deliver your own mail, be your own police and fire fighting departments and fight the war on terror all by yourself ???? I guess that means you won't have any time to be posting here any more. When will this commence? Actually, four. Thanks for reminding me. - I pay all of my bills in person or via online banking. 99% of my current mail is junk/spam anyways. I get all of my important mail online. - Fire - no problem. I can live without it, since 90% of all fire are electrical-related and I make sure that mine work perfectly. The others - if you don't have sprinkler systems in your house, you are way behind the times. I do. - Police? Their job is always to clean up after the fact. The truth is only YOU can protect your family and self. Read the laws - the police are charged with protecting the *public*, not individuals. 1-2 hours response time for a 911 call is the norm here. - War on Terror? The chances of me ever having to deal with it in Los Angeles are zero. Nobody takes this city seriously, so it's the least likely target in the U.S.(one advantage of living here). Plus, it has the largest foriegn population in the U.S., so again, attack here and you just **** off your own people. |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
Clyde Slick wrote: "Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message ink.net... We have a hell of a lot more than we did back then too. Are you planning to pave your own roads, maintain your local civic infrastructure, deliver your own mail, be your own fire and police deptartment, and fight your very own "war on terror"? The last three, certainly. You are planning to deliver your own mail, be your own police and fire fighting departments and fight the war on terror all by yourself ???? I guess that means you won't have any time to be posting here any more. When will this commence? Actually, four. Thanks for reminding me. - I pay all of my bills in person or via online banking. 99% of my current mail is junk/spam anyways. I get all of my important mail online. - Fire - no problem. I can live without it, since 90% of all fire are electrical-related and I make sure that mine work perfectly. The others - if you don't have sprinkler systems in your house, you are way behind the times. I do. - Police? Their job is always to clean up after the fact. The truth is only YOU can protect your family and self. Read the laws - the police are charged with protecting the *public*, not individuals. 1-2 hours response time for a 911 call is the norm here. - War on Terror? The chances of me ever having to deal with it in Los Angeles are zero. Nobody takes this city seriously, so it's the least likely target in the U.S.(one advantage of living here). Plus, it has the largest foriegn population in the U.S., so again, attack here and you just **** off your own people. |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ... Michael McKelvy wrote: Why is theft OK if the government does the stealing? To whit, there is an interesting correspondence between the patterns of net federal tax outflows and inflows and our recent election results http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/09/red_states_feed.html All the more reason to stop the theft. |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ... Michael McKelvy wrote: Why is theft OK if the government does the stealing? To whit, there is an interesting correspondence between the patterns of net federal tax outflows and inflows and our recent election results http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/09/red_states_feed.html All the more reason to stop the theft. |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message If those lovely leftists were so concerned with trying to help people, why did they set the age for collection of benefits at the age when most people were dead? I can't believe you're defending Republicans, the same lot who changed their rules so that even if a person is indicted for a crime, he can still be the leader of the House. What a joke. This time, Ethics has truly left the building. OT, it's my birthday today. |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message If those lovely leftists were so concerned with trying to help people, why did they set the age for collection of benefits at the age when most people were dead? I can't believe you're defending Republicans, the same lot who changed their rules so that even if a person is indicted for a crime, he can still be the leader of the House. What a joke. This time, Ethics has truly left the building. OT, it's my birthday today. |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
|
#111
|
|||
|
|||
WillStG wrote:
Shizoid Man" I can't believe you're defending Republicans, the same lot who changed their rules so that even if a person is indicted for a crime, he can still be the leader of the House. There is an elected judge in Texas that indicted himself for a minor crime, to avoid a more serious indictment. The guy also intends to indict Delay with the express purpose of unseating him, not because he is guilty of any crime. And as you all should know by now you can indict a ham sandwich providing you can convince a GRAND JURY that the ham sandwich has committed a crime .. Both Party's should not have to worry about indictments for purely partisan reasons, and the rules change is to prevent that kind of BS from interfering with the legitimate Legislative process. If a memebr is indicted they will meet and if they think the indictment is NOT just a nuisance action, then they will act. The point is the REPUBLICANS created this rule to get rid of democrats now that is about to bite them in the ass they suddenly flip-flop just like their boss, the flip-flop king george |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
WillStG wrote:
Shizoid Man" I can't believe you're defending Republicans, the same lot who changed their rules so that even if a person is indicted for a crime, he can still be the leader of the House. There is an elected judge in Texas that indicted himself for a minor crime, to avoid a more serious indictment. The guy also intends to indict Delay with the express purpose of unseating him, not because he is guilty of any crime. And as you all should know by now you can indict a ham sandwich providing you can convince a GRAND JURY that the ham sandwich has committed a crime .. Both Party's should not have to worry about indictments for purely partisan reasons, and the rules change is to prevent that kind of BS from interfering with the legitimate Legislative process. If a memebr is indicted they will meet and if they think the indictment is NOT just a nuisance action, then they will act. The point is the REPUBLICANS created this rule to get rid of democrats now that is about to bite them in the ass they suddenly flip-flop just like their boss, the flip-flop king george |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
Michael McKelvy wrote:
Then justify that bloated Democratic sacred cow known as Social Security, the greatest Ponzi scheme ever concocted by those socialist Democrats. Excuse the Democrats for actually trying to help people while the Republicans are super busy covering their own hides. Those *******s! They actually think that you ought to be responsible for your own fate. I don't know of a retirement that returns a worse return than SSI. My 401(k) with its former tech and Enron investments? |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
Michael McKelvy wrote:
Then justify that bloated Democratic sacred cow known as Social Security, the greatest Ponzi scheme ever concocted by those socialist Democrats. Excuse the Democrats for actually trying to help people while the Republicans are super busy covering their own hides. Those *******s! They actually think that you ought to be responsible for your own fate. I don't know of a retirement that returns a worse return than SSI. My 401(k) with its former tech and Enron investments? |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
WillStG wrote:
Shizoid Man" I can't believe you're defending Republicans, the same lot who changed their rules so that even if a person is indicted for a crime, he can still be the leader of the House. Both Party's should not have to worry about indictments for purely partisan reasons, and the rules change is to prevent that kind of BS from interfering with the legitimate Legislative process. Remember Whitewater? |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
WillStG wrote:
Shizoid Man" I can't believe you're defending Republicans, the same lot who changed their rules so that even if a person is indicted for a crime, he can still be the leader of the House. Both Party's should not have to worry about indictments for purely partisan reasons, and the rules change is to prevent that kind of BS from interfering with the legitimate Legislative process. Remember Whitewater? |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
indictments for purely
partisan reasons, and the rules change is to prevent that kind of BS from interfering with the legitimate Legislative process. can you say Impeachment of Clinton? that was the king of trumped up bull**** partisan harrasment that seriously hurt a great president distracting him from his real job George |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
indictments for purely
partisan reasons, and the rules change is to prevent that kind of BS from interfering with the legitimate Legislative process. can you say Impeachment of Clinton? that was the king of trumped up bull**** partisan harrasment that seriously hurt a great president distracting him from his real job George |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
"George Gleason" wrote in message ... GeoSynch wrote: George Gleason wrote: We simple want to pay for what we do not dump the burden on our children my unborn grandchildren will be doing without to pay down GW's spending spree Then justify that bloated Democratic sacred cow known as Social Security, the greatest Ponzi scheme ever concocted by those socialist Democrats. GeoSynch The repubs have been in the white house for the majority of the last 50 years why has nothing been done even Reagan didn't touch it Explain what it is you think Presidents can do about such things. |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
"George Gleason" wrote in message ... GeoSynch wrote: George Gleason wrote: We simple want to pay for what we do not dump the burden on our children my unborn grandchildren will be doing without to pay down GW's spending spree Then justify that bloated Democratic sacred cow known as Social Security, the greatest Ponzi scheme ever concocted by those socialist Democrats. GeoSynch The repubs have been in the white house for the majority of the last 50 years why has nothing been done even Reagan didn't touch it Explain what it is you think Presidents can do about such things. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! _____________---_ azikdi | General | |||
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! _____________---_ azikdi | Audio Opinions | |||
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! _____________---_ azikdi | Tech | |||
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! _____________---_ azikdi | Tech | |||
What are they Teaching | Audio Opinions |