"Change" - Good comic

[Bruce McAuley]

http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/infokits/change-management/aspects-of-change
You want Romney, Jim?
No change from Bush:rolleyes:
But I forgot you don't want change.
On edit, looks like the first political cartoon got deleted, so I get credit for this thread, but it ain't so!:eek:
Jim did it:p

Bruce

[JIMV]

Until folk define the 'change' it is little more than a slogan.

[Bruce McAuley]

Nope, don't need no stinkin' change around here, what we got is perfect.
War is GOOD for business!
Business loves Bush!
Except the little businesses are getting the shaft and the big ones are all moving offshore.
Don't need no stinkin' change...:eek:
Earth to Jim
Earth to Jim
Our worst enemy are the arrogant rich.:mad:
Dems as well as Repubs.:eek:

Bruce

[JIMV]

My enemies are anyone who inserts their fingers into my wallet, extracts money, and gthen spend it insuring political power. That is not a rich/poor issue but a political one.

[Drivesme]

Until folk define the 'change' it is little more than a slogan.

"the" change??
How about 'not what we have now because continuing down that path will surely bring an early end to America'.
That good enough for you?

[Drivesme]

My enemies are anyone who inserts their fingers into my wallet, extracts money, and gthen spend it insuring political power. That is not a rich/poor issue but a political one.

In that case you must be really ready for change!

[Bruce McAuley]

And you think it's the poor taking your money?
Really?
The rich have proven they are better at taking your money than the poor, Jim.
Who do you trust?
Who do you fear?
You can't afford to be a Republican, you're not rich enough to get all the tax breaks and you're not in the top 1%.
You're a wannabee.
You're being used, bud, and it's your own darned fault.:rolleyes:

Bruce

[JIMV]

And you think it's the poor taking your money?
Really?
The rich have proven they are better at taking your money than the poor, Jim.
Who do you trust?
Who do you fear?
You can't afford to be a Republican, you're not rich enough to get all the tax breaks and you're not in the top 1%.
You're a wannabee.
You're being used, bud, and it's your own darned fault.:rolleyes:

Bruce

The poor band together, elect pandering politicians, who then stick their fingers in my wallet under the color of law...not the rich, politicians, and every fellow who insists on something from the taxpayer they are not paying for.

[Erika]

Just the good old republican way in Idaho. Take from the masses to give to the few top elitists.

[JIMV]

Just the good old republican way in Idaho. Take from the masses to give to the few top elitists.

yeahm sure, except the top 10% of those 'elites' pay 90% of the taxes and that money goes to folk making and paying a whole lot less.

[Erika]

Ag pays no sales tax on purchases from gas to products. You evidently need to see the magic valley farmers filling up their RV's in November before spending the winter in the sunbelt.

Then look at the subsidies they get that the rest of us don't. Including Otter and Simplot. The blue areas, the working class, pay the taxes in Idaho.

[Bruce McAuley]

The top 1% own too much.
It's a simple fact.
The elite who have MORE are a drag on society. It is money that would be more beneficial spread widely throughout the society.
That 1% could easily live on way less than they HAVE.
How many Mercedes can one man drive at once?
How many houses does one person need?
There is a point, and we've long ago passed it, where these money magnets DETRACT from the viability of a society, and eventually lead to a revolution when the poor have nothing else to lose.
Sharing, in my estimation, is better than revolution, wouldn't you agree?:cool:

Bruce

[NuclearShadows]

The poor band together, elect pandering politicians, who then stick their fingers in my wallet under the color of law...not the rich, politicians, and every fellow who insists on something from the taxpayer they are not paying for.

Jesus said to him, "If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven;..."

[Drivesme]

The poor band together, elect pandering politicians, who then stick their fingers in my wallet under the color of law...not the rich, politicians, and every fellow who insists on something from the taxpayer they are not paying for.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Honestly, you can not really believe that can you jimmy?

[Drivesme]

yeahm sure, except the top 10% of those 'elites' pay 90% of the taxes and that money goes to folk making and paying a whole lot less.

Well that is not really true, and it doesn't effect you jimmy, so why do you care so much about people that you don't know and will never ever even meet?

Your party banties those numbers around like they mean something, but in truth they mean nothing at all.
Of course the 'rich' pay more taxes, that is the way or tax system is set up.
Your party must like it that way because after 12 years of control, they didn't do anything to change it.
Why is that jimmy?
Have you stopped to think about that or do you just repeat everything you hear on the radio thinking it makes you sound smart?

[JIMV]

Ag pays no sales tax on purchases from gas to products. You evidently need to see the magic valley farmers filling up their RV's in November before spending the winter in the sunbelt.

Then look at the subsidies they get that the rest of us don't. Including Otter and Simplot. The blue areas, the working class, pay the taxes in Idaho.

What percent? If they are like the rest of the country, way, way under half. There is a basic rule in taxation...you cannot take what folk don't have. The rich fund the country, the poor mooch and the middle class is along for the ride.

[JIMV]

The top 1% own too much.
It's a simple fact.

Or at least a simple opinion.:D

The elite who have MORE are a drag on society. It is money that would be more beneficial spread widely throughout the society.
That 1% could easily live on way less than they HAVE.
How many Mercedes can one man drive at once?
How many houses does one person need?

Simply class envy without meaning or merit beyond greed and envy.

There is a point, and we've long ago passed it, where these money magnets DETRACT from the viability of a society, and eventually lead to a revolution when the poor have nothing else to lose.
Sharing, in my estimation, is better than revolution, wouldn't you agree?:cool:

Bruce

'Sharing'....lets see. the top 10% pay 50% of all taxes but obviously that is not a big enough share, for those in the bottom 50% who pay about zip of the total.

You do realize this has nothing to do with America. The founders did not get together to figure how to rob the evil rich. They gathered to create the best working government in the world. That did not involve stealing from the productive to give to the non hackers.

I wish folk who are so green with envy over those better off would agree to pay THEIR fair share for a change. If they want to steal 50% of someone elses money, for the common good, then they should be willing to cough up 50% of their very own money....

[JIMV]

Well that is not really true, and it doesn't effect you jimmy, so why do you care so much about people that you don't know and will never ever even meet?

Your party banties those numbers around like they mean something, but in truth they mean nothing at all.
Of course the 'rich' pay more taxes, that is the way or tax system is set up.
Your party must like it that way because after 12 years of control, they didn't do anything to change it.
Why is that jimmy?
Have you stopped to think about that or do you just repeat everything you hear on the radio thinking it makes you sound smart?

Read your own post...it is a long list of democrat talking points, mostly from the Edwards campaign, all gussied up with pretend 'thinking'. Nothing original and nothing supported as of value to the country.

You pretend I favor robber barons, evil rich folk who try to take moeny from me, though I don't know how employing the country does that, while pretending robber government, where government does take money directly from the citizens and gives it to the folk in society who contribute the least.

You pretend that is moral and worse, sound economics. I see that emperor as naked as a wood nymph.;)

[Drivesme]

Read your own post...it is a long list of democrat talking points, mostly from the Edwards campaign, all gussied up with pretend 'thinking'. Nothing original and nothing supported as of value to the country.
No jimmy, my post is the truth. Just because you don't like it and can't refute it doesn't make it talking points.
If it isn't 'original' I can't help that, it still remains the truth.
If it isn't the truth, please refute it.

You pretend I favor robber barons, evil rich folk who try to take moeny from me, though I don't know how employing the country does that, while pretending robber government, where government does take money directly from the citizens and gives it to the folk in society who contribute the least.
Now that is nothing but talking points!
No one is "taking" anything from anyone.
I will ask you again, after 12 years of control, why hasn't your party done anything to change this horrible injustice being done to the poor down trodden rich??
Why jimmy?

You pretend that is moral and worse, sound economics. I see that emperor as naked as a wood nymph.;)
I pretend nothing of the sort, you are putting opinions and meanings into my words. I pointed out the facts to you jimmy, nothing more than that.
I offered no opinion what so ever other than to ask you questions that you will not answer for some reason, a reason we all know.

'Trickle down' or 'reaganomics' or 'VooDoo economics' does not work jimmy, we have been living it for almost 30 years now and look at the mess we are in.
The simple fact is this, when you give money to the 'rich', they keep it, period. Today, they keep it off shore, in truck loads. Look at the income/net worth of the top 1% and compare it to 30 years ago, then do the same with the middle class. That should scare the pants off of you, it won't because you are blind but it should. That alone is proof that your talking points do not hold water, at all.
Now look at the number of people living below the poverty line, has it gone or down in the last 30 years jimmy? Has the income level in this country gone up or down in the last 10 years?
You can live in denial about that all you want and you will rant and rave about talking points and blah blah blah but the bottom line it is the truth and anyone that can think for themselves knows it.
That is what this election is about, changing what doesn't work.
Changing your party's failed agenda's.

The only naked "wood nymph" is your blind support for your party and their failed agenda.

[Drivesme]

the top 10% pay 50% of all taxes


You keep saying this like it means something.
Tell us what you think this number means jimmy.
And also explain why the numbers keep changing.

Why didn't your great party do anything to correct this injustice??

[lenny]

You do realize this has nothing to do with America. The founders did not get together to figure how to rob the evil rich. They gathered to create the best working government in the world. That did not involve stealing from the productive to give to the non hackers.

You mean like slavery?

I wish folk who are so green with envy over those better off would agree to pay THEIR fair share for a change. If they want to steal 50% of someone else's money, for the common good, then they should be willing to cough up 50% of their very own money....

I agree that our tax system is a mess, and I don't pretend to have all the answers (I do get the feeling that you feel that you have it figured out though), but I certainly don't feel all that sorry for rich people, especially the top 10%. I would however take issue with the part I've emphasized above; it's just simplistic conjecture to imagine that 1) those of us who are not "rich" are envious of people who are gluttonous, vain, and have inherited their wealth, and 2) that people who are at the top of the pyramid financially are in some way "better off." I honestly feel that too much wealth and privilege makes for a weaker human being in most aspects, and that it's the lower, and middle classes that account for this countries true productivity. Just look at our current President as an example of the kind of productivity we get from the overprivileged. I suspect that the person with the most class envy in this thread would be the guy who wants to project those beliefs onto others.

[JIMV]

Jesus said to him, "If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven;..."

I thought the left was against theocracies?:rolleyes:

[JIMV]

No jimmy, my post is the truth. Just because you don't like it and can't refute it doesn't make it talking points.
If it isn't 'original' I can't help that, it still remains the truth.
If it isn't the truth, please refute it.

Refute what? You only posted an opinion. Sort of fact shy there sir.

Now that is nothing but talking points!
No one is "taking" anything from anyone.

Yeah, sure...the key economic position from the dems this time is revoking the tax cuts and they spending all that happy money on their voters.

I will ask you again, after 12 years of control, why hasn't your party done anything to change this horrible injustice being done to the poor down trodden rich??
Why jimmy?

I seem to hear you trying to have it both ways. Those folk passed tax cuts wheich the dems claim were for the rich but you now ask why nothing was done to protect the rich?? Are you finally addmitting those tax cuts went to eveyone who paid taxes!


I pretend nothing of the sort, you are putting opinions and meanings into my words. I pointed out the facts to you jimmy, nothing more than that.
I offered no opinion what so ever other than to ask you questions that you will not answer for some reason, a reason we all know.

There is another universal truth. A 'fact' is not a 'fact' simply because you pretend it is. You have sort of forgotten to back your 'facts' with anything other than your opinion...shoddy argument that.

'Trickle down' or 'reaganomics' or 'VooDoo economics' does not work jimmy, we have been living it for almost 30 years now and look at the mess we are in.

We are in a 'mess' because the same folk who created decent tax laws also spend more money on silly projects, for votes, than we take in. There is no leadership in Congress from either party....tax, spend and tax again.

The simple fact is this, when you give money to the 'rich', they keep it, period. Today, they keep it off shore, in truck loads. Look at the income/net worth of the top 1% and compare it to 30 years ago, then do the same with the middle class. That should scare the pants off of you, it won't because you are blind but it should. That alone is proof that your talking points do not hold water, at all.

Stealing from the rich would not provide enough loot for the dems to provide all the goodies they promise. Instead one needs to create a solid economy, and the dems are not offering that. Just more taxes and goodies for their base.

Now look at the number of people living below the poverty line, has it gone or down in the last 30 years jimmy? Has the income level in this country gone up or down in the last 10 years?

We've spent over 5 trillion dollars on the war on poverty since LBJ. I read a source long ago, before the 06 election that noted that we could have simply cut a check for a bit over 150,000 to each adult in official poverty. Instead we created the welfare state and flushed all that money down the toilet. It makes better political sense to keep all those folk in poverty and dependent on the government dime than to actually remove them from the rolls.


You can live in denial about that all you want and you will rant and rave about talking points and blah blah blah but the bottom line it is the truth and anyone that can think for themselves knows it.

I am sorry but simply regurgitating Edwards pablum and promises is not 'thinking for oneself', regarldess of how you dress up the act.

[JIMV]

You keep saying this like it means something.
Tell us what you think this number means jimmy.
And also explain why the numbers keep changing.

Why didn't your great party do anything to correct this injustice??

I would think was self evident. The left pretends the evil rich do not pay their 'fair share' and that the working folk pay the taxes. Even a quick trip to the 'who pays what' world of the treasury shows that those evil rich pay 90% of the bills in the country. If they pay the bills and the 'poor' amd middle class simply don't, the argument fails the reality test.

[Drivesme]

I would think was self evident. The left pretends the evil rich do not pay their 'fair share' and that the working folk pay the taxes. Even a quick trip to the 'who pays what' world of the treasury shows that those evil rich pay 90% of the bills in the country. If they pay the bills and the 'poor' amd middle class simply don't, the argument fails the reality test.
You can't answer the question can you?

What do the numbers you keep quoting from the GOP mean jimmy?
They must mean something, you repeat them enough, what do you think they mean?

[Drivesme]

Refute what? You only posted an opinion. Sort of fact shy there sir.
This fact jimmy.
Your party banties those numbers around like they mean something, but in truth they mean nothing at all.
Of course the 'rich' pay more taxes, that is the way or tax system is set up.

Keep avoiding it, that says all that needs to be said.

Yeah, sure...the key economic position from the dems this time is revoking the tax cuts and they spending all that happy money on their voters.
The key economic position of your party is to keep spending, and spending and spending.
Look where that has gotten us.
The economy under bush the loser sucks, 8 years of bad economy and you don't see any reason to change anything??
BTW, can you show some proof of your statement or are you just barking talking points?



I seem to hear you trying to have it both ways. Those folk passed tax cuts wheich the dems claim were for the rich but you now ask why nothing was done to protect the rich?? Are you finally addmitting those tax cuts went to eveyone who paid taxes!
They did go to the rich, but you are still whining and crying that they are paying too much.
In fact you can't help but quote the GOP and call it "stealing".





There is another universal truth. A 'fact' is not a 'fact' simply because you pretend it is. You have sort of forgotten to back your 'facts' with anything other than your opinion...shoddy argument that.
And yet you can't refute it at all can you??
That says a lot jimmy, thanks.



We are in a 'mess' because the same folk who created decent tax laws also spend more money on silly projects, for votes, than we take in. There is no leadership in Congress from either party....tax, spend and tax again.
We are in a mess because your party has had control of the nation for 12 years, they have out spent themselves every year.
Your party has screwed the nation jimmy.



Stealing from the rich would not provide enough loot for the dems to provide all the goodies they promise. Instead one needs to create a solid economy, and the dems are not offering that. Just more taxes and goodies for their base.
There is tyhe GOP "stealing" again!
BTW, in the last 12 years why didn't your great party "create a solid economy"??
Your party ruined the economy in the last 7 years.
BTW, I will again ask you to offer some proof of your statements, or are you still simply barking talking points?



We've spent over 5 trillion dollars on the war on poverty since LBJ. I read a source long ago, before the 06 election that noted that we could have simply cut a check for a bit over 150,000 to each adult in official poverty. Instead we created the welfare state and flushed all that money down the toilet. It makes better political sense to keep all those folk in poverty and dependent on the government dime than to actually remove them from the rolls.
More GOP lies and talking points, that is sure helpful isn't it?
5 trillion over 40 years,(that number is bogus but lets go with it.) put into the nations economy, money spent on food and other goods but in your mind that is "flushed down the toilet".
Lets compare that to the 1 trillion dollars spent by bush the loser in the last 5 years, on just the war, every dime of which has been spent over seas.
At that rate, 1 trillion every 5 years, for 40 years, your party will have spent 9 trillion dollars. All of which will be spent over seas.
Who is the big spender here jimmy?

Normally war is good for the economy, not this one.




I am sorry but simply regurgitating Edwards pablum and promises is not 'thinking for oneself', regarldess of how you dress up the act.
Please prove that I have "regurgitated" anything from anyone jimmy.
You make this cliam time and time again yet you have never been able to prove it, do it now or STFU.
I can prove your talking points, lets see you put up or shut up for once jimmy.

[JIMV]

You can't answer the question can you?

What do the numbers you keep quoting from the GOP mean jimmy?
They must mean something, you repeat them enough, what do you think they mean?

obviously for the comprehensionally challenged, repeating the post is in order

"I would think was self evident. The left pretends the evil rich do not pay their 'fair share' and that the working folk pay the taxes. Even a quick trip to the 'who pays what' world of the treasury shows that those evil rich pay 90% of the bills in the country. If they pay the bills and the 'poor' and middle class simply don't, the argument fails the reality test."

What part of that do you not understand?:rolleyes:

[JIMV]

This fact jimmy.
Your party banties those numbers around like they mean something, but in truth they mean nothing at all.
Of course the 'rich' pay more taxes, that is the way or tax system is set up.

Keep avoiding it, that says all that needs to be said.

Avoiding it? I responded directly to this issue…I’ll try again and type slowly so you might follow….If, as the left claims, the evil rich do not pay their fair share BUT they do pay 90% of the taxes paid, then the left must believe their ‘fair share’ is some greater number…perhaps 95% of the taxes paid. Put another way. How is the overwhelming majority of the folk in the country not paying diddly in taxes ‘fair’?

The key economic position of your party is to keep spending, and spending and spending.

The dems control congress and that is where the spending comes from. The Republican Party has little to do with today’s spending…the dems own it.

And yet you can't refute it at all can you??
That says a lot jimmy, thanks.

You haven’t posted anything that I have not refuted. The problem is, unless you agree with me, you pretend no effort was made. As you never agree, your pretense is universal.

BTW, I will again ask you to offer some proof of your statements, or are you still simply barking talking points?

Another gibberish complaint…you need to get specific. Which statement? I proved the rich pay the majority of taxes. I proved the media is perceived as biased. I proved the viewership for cable news was predominantly FOX. I have proved in previous forums that the terror eavesdropping program is legal.

Actually, it is you who is long on opinion and short of proof. You say something and demand anyone who disagrees prove you wrong. When they do, you pretend the proof never occurred!

More GOP lies and talking points, that is sure helpful isn't it?
5 trillion over 40 years,(that number is bogus but lets go with it.) put into the nations economy, money spent on food and other goods but in your mind that is "flushed down the toilet".
Let's compare that to the 1 trillion dollars spent by bush the loser in the last 5 years, on just the war, every dime of which has been spent over seas.
At that rate, 1 trillion every 5 years, for 40 years, your party will have spent 9 trillion dollars. All of which will be spent over seas.
Who is the big spender here jimmy?

Again you are too lazy to check your numbers and you obviously know nothing of military procurement if you think all that money was spent overseas…military salaries and contractor bucks alone belie your contention. It was simply opinion gussied up as fact and left hanging in the wind to se who saluted.

[JIMV]

Please prove that I have "regurgitated" anything from anyone jimmy.
You make this cliam time and time again yet you have never been able to prove it, do it now or STFU.
I can prove your talking points, lets see you put up or shut up for once jimmy.

Do you really want me to do your research for you again? Do you really want to embarrass yourself?

Ok, here is what you wrote:

” It's reaganomics and it has destroyed this country.
The change since raygun took office economically in this country 180 degrees from where we were before.
We are on the road to ruin and picking up speed.”

“Your court case mean nothing jimmy, remember they are from this administration and that alone makes them worthless.
Surveillance is not welcome in this country, as your boy found out.
It is a legitimate "high crime" committed by this president.”

And

“The key economic position of your party is to keep spending, and spending and spending.
Look where that has gotten us.
The economy under bush the loser sucks, 8 years of bad economy and you don't see any reason to change anything??”

Lets clean up the mess into something approaching ideas:

1. Reaganomics have destroyed the country
2. Court cases on terror surveillance don’t matter
3. The key republican program is to keep spending
4. The economy under Bush is a disaster

I note you offer no proof of any of these contentions

Now let’s look at the various democrat campaigns:

*The economy is a disaster – from the Edwards Campaign “"Here's what's happened," Edwards continued. "Corporate greed and political calculation have taken over our government and sold out the middle class. Our government is selling out their future at the command of lobbyists and their corporate clients and we have to rise up together and stop it.”

And “Because of corporate greed and a broken system in Washington, almost half of all economic growth over the past 20 years has gone to the top one percent of American families. Middle-class incomes have stagnated for the past seven years, the number of Americans living in poverty is growing every year, and families are working longer hours, but finding it harder to get by.”

* Court cases don’t matter – From the Edwards campaign “Maximize the constitutional protection for corporations and property rights. Minimize the constitutional commitment to equality. And restrict the power of the federal government to solve the country's problems. Of course, the radicals don't talk that way.
Their jurisprudence is cloaked in abstract legal principles that sound reasonable — strict constructionism, interpretation rather than legislation, original intent, judicial restraint. But the reality simply does not match the rhetoric.”

(In other words, ‘don’t bother me with this case law stuff’)

*Keep spending – from the Hillary campaign “They see $9 trillion in debt and say, "Why not trillions more?" They see tax cuts for wealthy Americans and big corporations and say, "Why not more?" They see one attempt to privatize Social Security and say, "Why not one more?" In short, they see eight years of Bush economics and say, "Why not eight more?"

*Reaganomics – This is tough…every democrat campaign seems to want to wack some bit of Reaganomics. You will need a specific issue for me to figure out where you found your position on that one.

I am not claiming you parrot the dem positions word for word, you are not that eloquent. No, you just use their key ideas and pretend you came by these ideas magically on your own.

Sorry, but you are no more an original thinker than anyone else on this forum.

[Drivesme]

Lets clean up the mess into something approaching ideas:

1. Reaganomics have destroyed the country
2. Court cases on terror surveillance don’t matter
3. The key republican program is to keep spending
4. The economy under Bush is a disaster

I note you offer no proof of any of these contentions
In other words "let me reword this it fits what I want it to"


Now let’s look at the various democrat campaigns:

*The economy is a disaster – from the Edwards Campaign “"Here's what's happened," Edwards continued. "Corporate greed and political calculation have taken over our government and sold out the middle class. Our government is selling out their future at the command of lobbyists and their corporate clients and we have to rise up together and stop it.”
I have never said anything remotely close to this jimmy.


And “Because of corporate greed and a broken system in Washington, almost half of all economic growth over the past 20 years has gone to the top one percent of American families. Middle-class incomes have stagnated for the past seven years, the number of Americans living in poverty is growing every year, and families are working longer hours, but finding it harder to get by.”
This is true, but not because of "corporate greed", that is part of it to be sure but only part of it.
Now, why can't you refute it jimmy??


* Court cases don’t matter – From the Edwards campaign “Maximize the constitutional protection for corporations and property rights. Minimize the constitutional commitment to equality. And restrict the power of the federal government to solve the country's problems. Of course, the radicals don't talk that way.
Their jurisprudence is cloaked in abstract legal principles that sound reasonable — strict constructionism, interpretation rather than legislation, original intent, judicial restraint. But the reality simply does not match the rhetoric.”

(In other words, ‘don’t bother me with this case law stuff’)
Again, if you are making some wild claim that I have said anything like this, you are not coming close to 'proving' it.
All you are doing is wasting bandwidth.


*Keep spending – from the Hillary campaign “They see $9 trillion in debt and say, "Why not trillions more?" They see tax cuts for wealthy Americans and big corporations and say, "Why not more?" They see one attempt to privatize Social Security and say, "Why not one more?" In short, they see eight years of Bush economics and say, "Why not eight more?"
Of course I haven't said anything like this either.
So far you are not doing a very good job jimmy.
I never thought you could though.

*Reaganomics – This is tough…every democrat campaign seems to want to wack some bit of Reaganomics. You will need a specific issue for me to figure out where you found your position on that one.
reaganomics as a whole is a failure jimmy, you know as well as anyone.
Are you claiming that the economy is good?

I am not claiming you parrot the dem positions word for word, you are not that eloquent. No, you just use their key ideas and pretend you came by these ideas magically on your own.
Now you are just lying jimmy.
Don't do that.

Sorry, but you are no more an original thinker than anyone else on this forum.
Never claimed to be, unlike you.
jimmy you have failed to back up your claim, as expected, however I will give at least some credit for trying, which more than you have ever done before.

[Drivesme]

Avoiding it? I responded directly to this issue…I’ll try again and type slowly so you might follow….If, as the left claims, the evil rich do not pay their fair share BUT they do pay 90% of the taxes paid, then the left must believe their ‘fair share’ is some greater number…perhaps 95% of the taxes paid. Put another way. How is the overwhelming majority of the folk in the country not paying diddly in taxes ‘fair’?
The "left" doesn't make that claim.
That is just your GOP talking points.
Now, what do YOU think the numbers mean? You use them all the time, YOU must think they mean something.




The dems control congress and that is where the spending comes from. The Republican Party has little to do with today’s spending…the dems own it.
You know better than this jimmy, at least you should.



You haven’t posted anything that I have not refuted. The problem is, unless you agree with me, you pretend no effort was made. As you never agree, your pretense is universal.
You keep saying that jimmy, yet it is not true.



Another gibberish complaint…you need to get specific. Which statement? I proved the rich pay the majority of taxes. I proved the media is perceived as biased. I proved the viewership for cable news was predominantly FOX. I have proved in previous forums that the terror eavesdropping program is legal.
HA! None of which has ever been in question jimmy! (other than the domestic spying and you have never proven anything of the sort!)
All of those things are your contentions, you have "proven" the sky is blue.
So what.
None of these things mean anything jimmy because you are the only one that has brought them up!


Actually, it is you who is long on opinion and short of proof. You say something and demand anyone who disagrees prove you wrong. When they do, you pretend the proof never occurred!
You haven't proven me or anyone else wrong jimmy, sorry.
I know you think you have but you haven't.



Again you are too lazy to check your numbers and you obviously know nothing of military procurement if you think all that money was spent overseas…military salaries and contractor bucks alone belie your contention. It was simply opinion gussied up as fact and left hanging in the wind to se who saluted.
Well Capitan obvious, thank you so much for pointing out what we all knew.
Is the use of the words any, all, every, etc. the only defense you have??
My god jimmy war is usually good for the economy, this one isn't why do you think that is??
Where has that trillion dollars gone?
10 billion a month, that isn't pocket change, why isn't that propping up our failing economy?

[JIMV]

A non all opinion response...again.

[JIMV]

jimmy you have failed to back up your claim, as expected, however I will give at least some credit for trying, which more than you have ever done before.

My 'failure to back up my claim' is entierly in your eyes (and perhaps the eyes of other who do the exact same thing.)

As I have posted before, just because you say something does not make it so.

Put forth an argument, back it with cites and links to more than opinion, and we'll discuss the issue.

Post more simply opinions gleaned from the leftist ether, and we will contine to exchange one liners, with you taking the brunt of the damage.

[JIMV]

Are you saying the left does NOT claim this:

Jim-the evil rich do not pay their fair share

Wow!...and you expect readers to buy this?

In America today, families are working harder and struggling to get by, while powerful special interests in Washington are doing better than ever. Income inequality is at its greatest level since 1928. But the number of Washington lobbyists has tripled to 36,000 since 1996, more than 60 for every member of Congress. Our tax code is the perfect example of the Two Americas – one for the wealthiest Americans and Washington insiders, and the other for everyone else. John Edwards believes that wholesale changes are needed to put our economy and our tax system back in line with our values. [Pew, 2007; Saez, 2007; SOPR, 2006]

Let’s see, ‘income inequality’, ‘our tax code is the perfect example of two America’s’, yeah, nothing from the left about the rich not paying their fair share…or perhaps you do not consider the Edwards campaign part of the left….

[Drivesme]

A non all opinion response...again.
Yeah but I didn't call you on it did I??

[Drivesme]

Are you saying the left does NOT claim this:



Wow!...and you expect readers to buy this?
Yep. Only the GOP is claiming the "left" is saying that.



Let’s see, ‘income inequality’, ‘our tax code is the perfect example of two America’s’, yeah, nothing from the left about the rich not paying their fair share…or perhaps you do not consider the Edwards campaign part of the left….
Edwards might be saying that, who knows since those are not his words, I don't know who's words those are as you give no source. Did you get them from the GOP?

I really don't put much stock in what is said on the campaign trail, by anyone, it's a campaign after all.
And I really don't put any stock at all in Edwards populist bull.

Again I have to ask you why you think the percentage of what the 'rich' pay has any meaning.
Why can't you answer that question jimmy?
Say the 'left' believes blah blah blah is not telling me what YOU think the meaning of your ever changing numbers are.

Do you really think our economy has done well under your party's control?
Do you think the economy is doing good today?
Do you think the rise in income of the top 10% compared to the rest of the country is a good thing?

[JIMV]

Edwards might be saying that, who knows since those are not his words, I don't know who's words those are as you give no source. Did you get them from the GOP?

This is so easy...you load the firing squads rifles for them...

http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/tax-reform/

That is the Edwards' Campaign site...unlike you, I do research.

[JIMV]

Again I have to ask you why you think the percentage of what the 'rich' pay has any meaning.
Why can't you answer that question jimmy?
Say the 'left' believes blah blah blah is not telling me what YOU think the meaning of your ever changing numbers are.

This is amazing…I posted specific answers two or three times and yet you are oblivious…

Again, for the sillier amongst us, again…

I would think was self evident. The left pretends the evil rich do not pay their 'fair share' and that the working folk pay the taxes. Even a quick trip to the 'who pays what' world of the treasury shows that those evil rich pay 90% of the bills in the country. If they pay the bills and the 'poor' amd middle class simply don't, the argument fails the reality test.

And again when you blew past it the first time:

obviously for the comprehensionly challenged, repeating the post is in order

"I would think was self evident. The left pretends the evil rich do not pay their 'fair share' and that the working folk pay the taxes. Even a quick trip to the 'who pays what' world of the treasury shows that those evil rich pay 90% of the bills in the country. If they pay the bills and the 'poor' and middle class simply don't, the argument fails the reality test."

What part of that do you not understand?

And for the third time…If the rich pay almost all the taxes, then they are already paying their fair share. They pay the bills that our Congress so gleefully spends on a host of stupid programs.

That is what the numbers mean. That is also self evident. please do not ask the same question again, you embarass yourself and it is simply no challenge to respond.

[Drivesme]

This is so easy...you load the firing squads rifles for them...

http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/tax-reform/

That is the Edwards' Campaign site...unlike you, I do research.
You didn't provide a source for your first quote, but somehow that is my fault??:rolleyes:

On top of that who gives a damn what Edwards says anyway?

[Drivesme]

This is amazing…I posted specific answers two or three times and yet you are oblivious…

Again, for the sillier amongst us, again…



And again when you blew past it the first time:



And for the third time…If the rich pay almost all the taxes, then they are already paying their fair share. They pay the bills that our Congress so gleefully spends on a host of stupid programs.

That is what the numbers mean. That is also self evident. please do not ask the same question again, you embarass yourself and it is simply no challenge to respond.
You just can't give anything but the standard talking points can you?
That is sad jimmy, really sad.

[JIMV]

You just can't give anything but the standard talking points can you?
That is sad jimmy, really sad.

you have degenerated to the point that you are not even responding in talking points, just random gibberish. Try posing an argument, backing it with evidence and producing counter argument when challenged. it is not that hard. Simply dismissing all opposing views without providing any real argument doesn't hack it.

[Drivesme]

you have degenerated to the point that you are not even responding in talking points, just random gibberish. Try posing an argument, backing it with evidence and producing counter argument when challenged. it is not that hard. Simply dismissing all opposing views without providing any real argument doesn't hack it.
jimmy, stop talking to yourself, creeps people out.

[JIMV]

Whoosh...right over his head....sigh:(

[Drivesme]

Whoosh...right over his head....sigh:(
Not hardly jimmy, not hardly.:rolleyes::rolleyes: