• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

The Neo-Con plan to bankrupt America to end government spending, entitlements, the welfare state etc....

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,661
755
126
Originally posted by: m1ldslide1
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: senseamp
Good, then the Republicans should run on the "We'll tax you through inflation so we can cut taxes on the rich" platform. If it's such a great idea, I am sure it will be an overwhelming success at the polls.
I agree.

And are the Democrats gonna run on "We want to offer more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place?"
What an election year it would be! Finally we would have some honesty from both sides. I think there would be a *chance* at a successful 3rd party candidate at that point.
and what, pre tel, would a 3rd party candidate do?


LOL
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,661
755
126
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: senseamp
Good, then the Republicans should run on the "We'll tax you through inflation so we can cut taxes on the rich" platform. If it's such a great idea, I am sure it will be an overwhelming success at the polls.
I agree.

And are the Democrats gonna run on "We want to offer more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place?"
Like the Medicare prescription drug benefit? Oh wait, that was the GOP and your pal W.
So youre against lower drug costs for the elderly?

Fuckin cold hearted....
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,661
755
126
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: senseamp
Good, then the Republicans should run on the "We'll tax you through inflation so we can cut taxes on the rich" platform. If it's such a great idea, I am sure it will be an overwhelming success at the polls.
I agree.

And are the Democrats gonna run on "We want to offer more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place?"
Like the Medicare prescription drug benefit? Oh wait, that was the GOP and your pal W.
So youre against lower drug costs for the elderly?

Fuckin cold hearted....
edit: Oh and BTW...if the GOP is so FOR raising taxes on the middle class and cutting them for the rich, why didnt the rich get a tax rebate? /scratch head
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,902
0
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: AAjax
Awww shucks your half right, it is a rather large conspiracy to bankrupt the nation. But get this, both of your precious parties are in on it. Shhhhhh its a secret.
we know .. and they are not so "precious"
- Cheney has been heard to mutter wandering the subterranean halls unnder the White House late at night; 12 gauge shotgun under his arm ... My precious ... My Preeeecccious ...
. . . something about, his Master wants his Ring back
- would that make his, a Dick ring?




it's in the name of ... ummm
ahh ...
.. entertainment .. yes, that's it



very amusing if you are Super-Rich
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,887
4,842
126
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: senseamp
Good, then the Republicans should run on the "We'll tax you through inflation so we can cut taxes on the rich" platform. If it's such a great idea, I am sure it will be an overwhelming success at the polls.
I agree.

And are the Democrats gonna run on "We want to offer more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place?"
Like the Medicare prescription drug benefit? Oh wait, that was the GOP and your pal W.
So youre against lower drug costs for the elderly?

Fuckin cold hearted....
edit: Oh and BTW...if the GOP is so FOR raising taxes on the middle class and cutting them for the rich, why didnt the rich get a tax rebate? /scratch head
Democrat Congress.
The prescription drug benefit, AKA "more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place," was GOP Congress and GOP president, unlike Bamacre's claim that it's the Democrat platform.
Plus it's not like this Rebate is actually paid for by anything other than outright inflation thanks to all that money being printed.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,661
755
126
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: senseamp
Good, then the Republicans should run on the "We'll tax you through inflation so we can cut taxes on the rich" platform. If it's such a great idea, I am sure it will be an overwhelming success at the polls.
I agree.

And are the Democrats gonna run on "We want to offer more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place?"
Like the Medicare prescription drug benefit? Oh wait, that was the GOP and your pal W.
So youre against lower drug costs for the elderly?

Fuckin cold hearted....
edit: Oh and BTW...if the GOP is so FOR raising taxes on the middle class and cutting them for the rich, why didnt the rich get a tax rebate? /scratch head
Democrat Congress.
The prescription drug benefit, AKA "more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place," was GOP Congress and GOP president, unlike Bamacre's claim that it's the Democrat platform.
Plus it's not like this Rebate is actually paid for by anything other than outright inflation thanks to all that money being printed.
OK, so you dont think middle class should get a tax cut? Do you think the current federal rate is fair? or too low?
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,034
1
61
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: senseamp
Good, then the Republicans should run on the "We'll tax you through inflation so we can cut taxes on the rich" platform. If it's such a great idea, I am sure it will be an overwhelming success at the polls.
I agree.

And are the Democrats gonna run on "We want to offer more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place?"
Like the Medicare prescription drug benefit? Oh wait, that was the GOP and your pal W.
So youre against lower drug costs for the elderly?

Fuckin cold hearted....
edit: Oh and BTW...if the GOP is so FOR raising taxes on the middle class and cutting them for the rich, why didnt the rich get a tax rebate? /scratch head
Democrat Congress.
The prescription drug benefit, AKA "more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place," was GOP Congress and GOP president, unlike Bamacre's claim that it's the Democrat platform.
Plus it's not like this Rebate is actually paid for by anything other than outright inflation thanks to all that money being printed.
My reference to "more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place," was in regards to the Dem's UHC they're pushing.

The problem you have with people like myself is that you can't apologize for the Democrats by blaming us for the GOP's mistakes.

I have seen the horrible problems with the GOP. That should be obvious.

Now if only people like yourself can do the same, see the problems with your own party, this country would be doing a lot better.

My pal, Bush? LOL, please.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,584
345
126
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: senseamp
Good, then the Republicans should run on the "We'll tax you through inflation so we can cut taxes on the rich" platform. If it's such a great idea, I am sure it will be an overwhelming success at the polls.
I agree.

And are the Democrats gonna run on "We want to offer more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place?"
Like the Medicare prescription drug benefit? Oh wait, that was the GOP and your pal W.
So youre against lower drug costs for the elderly?

Fuckin cold hearted....
edit: Oh and BTW...if the GOP is so FOR raising taxes on the middle class and cutting them for the rich, why didnt the rich get a tax rebate? /scratch head
Blackangst, your views on some issues are *way* off, IMO.

It's like trying to talk to someone who has only read Pravda.

Anyway, to take just this post for now, let's review for the umpteenth time (you haven't read the info any of the other countless times it's been posted, since you get it wrong?):

The Medicare drug bill is a Republican bill, because the Republicans' #1 donor industry was the pharmaceutical industry, and they wanted to corruptly reward them, and since they couldn't pass the "Thanks for all the donations, big Pharma!" bill, they changed the name to one that they could hide the giveaway behind.

"Oh, ya, all that bitching about big government and excessive social spending? Well, on this one area, while our party fought against Medicare, we're all for it for the elderly! Half a trillion dollars at a time of returned deficits, tax cuts for the wealthy, and the war spending among other things? No problem! And if you disagree, you are against the elderly getting cheap medicine!"

Of course, it was a *corrupt political ploy*, and you can tell a lot more easily than with many such corrupt political ploys. The nice thing about them is that they have limited room to maneuver, since the purpose is to scam money, so you find a few basic tricks used repeatedly, such as the 'give a little to the cover group and hype that all day, while giving a lot to the hidden group and hide that'.

Two clues:

1. The drug bill didn't help the elderly all that much, and for many, actually made prescription drugs *more expensive*. So where did the money go?

2. This is the most important piece of evidence. The bill had a line in it which added $150 to the cost, but had no purpose other than to hand tax dollars to the drug companies. It was the reason the bill was passed. The line was a ban on the government negotiating cheaper drug prices. The VA negotiates drug prices, HMO's negotiate drug prices, other countries' UHC systems negotiate drug prices, but the Republicans made the taxpayers pay list price in perhaps the biggest drug buy of all. THIS IS PROOF OF CORRUPTION.

Now, let's look at some of the related behaviors from Republicans.

- They named this one of their top two domestic priorities (with the tax cuts). Hm, sudden passion for social programs for the needy, or for doing what they were paid to for donors?

- Congress - even their lapdog Republican congress, with some who actually believed that nonsense about not wasting money - put a limit on how much they'd spend on what they had a sense was this political payola bill. The leadership relentlessly beat them into submission to cooperate, and they would, but they said they would not spend over so much.

The man who was in the administration to calculate the cost of the bill knew it was more than that, but was ordered to lie to Congress by his higher-up Bush appointees.

They threatened him and he did as ordered - and then told Congress later what had happened. Only those who care about such corruption paid much attention.

- The way the bill was passed was among the ugliest in history. The vote was held, and the bill lost. The leadership simply declared the vote wasn't over, and extended it again and again, while they had people out on the floor, walking around to the Republicans voting no, offering effectively pressure, quid pro quos and threats. On angry congressman with a son planning to run for Congress said he was told his son would get $100,000 for the campaign if he voted yes, and blackballed by the GOP if he voted no. He later partly recanted.

The vote remained for many hours all night, until they finally got enough to switch their votes to pass it. It's reportedly the first time in the history of the country that happened.

That's your 'Medicare drug bill', and your dishonest cheap taunt that someone who is against is 'doesn't care about the elderly', you think you're being so cute to sneer.

Now for your edit, why the rebates didn't go to the wealthy:

1. Democrats are in charge of Congress now. They had no choice anymore.

2. It goes back to the 'give a little to the legitimate group, for cover' point I made above.

3. The wealthy don't need a fixed-amount rebate of $600 per person, and as any economist could say, it wouldn't serve the purpose of the program, to stimulate spending.

They can't go around making it TOO obvious how corrupt it is over such a small issue. Ultimately, this money will serve their purpose too - a healthier economy can be bi-partisan.

4. They've already gotten the corrupt tax cuts for the wealthy.

If a husband buys himself a new motorcycle they can't afford, and then take the wife to dinner at her favorite restaurant to say 'sorry', it doesn't mean things are then equal.

Now, you should printout the Medicare summary above and read it until you remember it, so we can stop having to correct the wrong info several years later anymore.

But the disagreement goes way beyond these issues - you have what I see as a huge lack of understanding of wealth leading you to think terrible policies for the middle class are ok.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,661
755
126
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: senseamp
Good, then the Republicans should run on the "We'll tax you through inflation so we can cut taxes on the rich" platform. If it's such a great idea, I am sure it will be an overwhelming success at the polls.
I agree.

And are the Democrats gonna run on "We want to offer more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place?"
Like the Medicare prescription drug benefit? Oh wait, that was the GOP and your pal W.
So youre against lower drug costs for the elderly?

Fuckin cold hearted....
edit: Oh and BTW...if the GOP is so FOR raising taxes on the middle class and cutting them for the rich, why didnt the rich get a tax rebate? /scratch head
Blackangst, your views on some issues are *way* off, IMO.

It's like trying to talk to someone who has only read Pravda.

Anyway, to take just this post for now, let's review for the umpteenth time (you haven't read the info any of the other countless times it's been posted, since you get it wrong?):

The Medicare drug bill is a Republican bill, because the Republicans' #1 donor industry was the pharmaceutical industry, and they wanted to corruptly reward them, and since they couldn't pass the "Thanks for all the donations, big Pharma!" bill, they changed the name to one that they could hide the giveaway behind.

"Oh, ya, all that bitching about big government and excessive social spending? Well, on this one area, while our party fought against Medicare, we're all for it for the elderly! Half a trillion dollars at a time of returned deficits, tax cuts for the wealthy, and the war spending among other things? No problem! And if you disagree, you are against the elderly getting cheap medicine!"

Of course, it was a *corrupt political ploy*, and you can tell a lot more easily than with many such corrupt political ploys. The nice thing about them is that they have limited room to maneuver, since the purpose is to scam money, so you find a few basic tricks used repeatedly, such as the 'give a little to the cover group and hype that all day, while giving a lot to the hidden group and hide that'.

Two clues:

1. The drug bill didn't help the elderly all that much, and for many, actually made prescription drugs *more expensive*. So where did the money go?

2. This is the most important piece of evidence. The bill had a line in it which added $150 to the cost, but had no purpose other than to hand tax dollars to the drug companies. It was the reason the bill was passed. The line was a ban on the government negotiating cheaper drug prices. The VA negotiates drug prices, HMO's negotiate drug prices, other countries' UHC systems negotiate drug prices, but the Republicans made the taxpayers pay list price in perhaps the biggest drug buy of all. THIS IS PROOF OF CORRUPTION.

Now, let's look at some of the related behaviors from Republicans.

- They named this one of their top two domestic priorities (with the tax cuts). Hm, sudden passion for social programs for the needy, or for doing what they were paid to for donors?

- Congress - even their lapdog Republican congress, with some who actually believed that nonsense about not wasting money - put a limit on how much they'd spend on what they had a sense was this political payola bill. The leadership relentlessly beat them into submission to cooperate, and they would, but they said they would not spend over so much.

The man who was in the administration to calculate the cost of the bill knew it was more than that, but was ordered to lie to Congress by his higher-up Bush appointees.

They threatened him and he did as ordered - and then told Congress later what had happened. Only those who care about such corruption paid much attention.

- The way the bill was passed was among the ugliest in history. The vote was held, and the bill lost. The leadership simply declared the vote wasn't over, and extended it again and again, while they had people out on the floor, walking around to the Republicans voting no, offering effectively pressure, quid pro quos and threats. On angry congressman with a son planning to run for Congress said he was told his son would get $100,000 for the campaign if he voted yes, and blackballed by the GOP if he voted no. He later partly recanted.

The vote remained for many hours all night, until they finally got enough to switch their votes to pass it. It's reportedly the first time in the history of the country that happened.

That's your 'Medicare drug bill', and your dishonest cheap taunt that someone who is against is 'doesn't care about the elderly', you think you're being so cute to sneer.

Now for your edit, why the rebates didn't go to the wealthy:

1. Democrats are in charge of Congress now. They had no choice anymore.

2. It goes back to the 'give a little to the legitimate group, for cover' point I made above.

3. The wealthy don't need a fixed-amount rebate of $600 per person, and as any economist could say, it wouldn't serve the purpose of the program, to stimulate spending.

They can't go around making it TOO obvious how corrupt it is over such a small issue. Ultimately, this money will serve their purpose too - a healthier economy can be bi-partisan.

4. They've already gotten the corrupt tax cuts for the wealthy.

If a husband buys himself a new motorcycle they can't afford, and then take the wife to dinner at her favorite restaurant to say 'sorry', it doesn't mean things are then equal.

Now, you should printout the Medicare summary above and read it until you remember it, so we can stop having to correct the wrong info several years later anymore.

But the disagreement goes way beyond these issues - you have what I see as a huge lack of understanding of wealth leading you to think terrible policies for the middle class are ok.
eh....I dont disagree with most of what you posted Craig.... :confused:
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY