The W
Views: 99951697
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
@568 .beats
The W - Current Events & Politics - Torch the Torch (Page 5)
This thread has 31 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next(2454 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (113 total)
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 9 hours
#81 Posted on
    Originally posted by PalpatineW


      Before you start railing that I want to kick grandma out in the cold and starve poor women and children, well... don't. I've never taken a stand against helping the poor. I do, however, take a stand against GOVERNMENT helping the poor (and I use this term somewhat loosely). I believe in a minimalist government. Defense, police, courts, infrastructure and not much else past that. After all, if I drastically reduse your taxes, Moe, then you are free to send all that money you saved on to the poor. And I suspect very many people would. Just because a giant bureaucracy isn't feeding people doesn't mean they won't eat. What it comes down to is the larger the gov't and the higher the taxes, the fewer the choices I am allowed to make with my money and my life. The welfare state coerces me into some manner of charity. Removing social programs would not force me to NOT give my money to others, but it would give me a CHOICE. Unless you're anti-choice, Moe?


      And even if I didn't work too hard to get my inherited money, whose right to it is greater? Mine, or the government's?

      (edited by PalpatineW on 29.9.02 1335)



    OK, I see you DID need to get another rant out of your system. Let me try again.

    Let's say you're completely in charge of the tax code and government spending. You cut all the spending you want to cut. The federal government now spends money only on what you think is necessary.

    Question a) Is this more than $1.00? Since you mentioned defense, courts, police, infrastructure, I'm guessing yes.

    if answer is yes:

    Question b) how would you personally go about getting that money? Lots of fees? A national sales tax? A flat tax? An income tax? An investment tax? A property tax? Tariffs and Duties? Some combination thereof? Tax the states and let them decide how to get the money? What?

    All I said is my priorities would be a) inheritance tax, b) investment/capital gains, c)income (This is also by no means complete, I haven't really thought about it that much. And I might change my mind later, I don't know), and as a general rules, I would tax non-earned income before earned income. This means everyone is getting a big old income tax cut in my plan, across the board.

    This has nothing to do with what levels the taxes would be at, or the size of the federal government, or what the Federal government spends or does not spend it's money on. Maybe I'd spend more than you. Maybe less. I don't know. I'm sure we's spend it in different ways. That's not what my post is about.

    (edited by MoeGates on 29.9.02 2256)


    Expressing myself EVERY day - but especially on July 22, 2002!
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1269 days
Last activity: 1066 days
#82 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
I am against the war in Iraq. I also know better than to have the GALL to call my own country a terrorist state. That is so bombastically insane it makes me laugh.

It is amazing however that people who seem to believe our country is such a horrible place refuse to leave it.

EDIT


    Originally posted by Jaguar

    If you can't get your point across without name-calling or trying to demonize me for what I think then don't even bother replying.



Sorry, I was pretending to be a liberal for a moment.



EDIT AGAIN: Back on topic, Torch may quit: Toricelli may quit senate race
(edited by Grimis on 30.9.02 0708)

(edited by Grimis on 30.9.02 1155)

(edited by Grimis on 30.9.02 1156)
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 9 hours
#83 Posted on
It is amazing however that people who seem to believe our country is such a horrible place refuse to leave it.

That's because we're generally only really horrible to people who don't live in our country. The fact that this is a great place to live doesn't mean we don't also make other people's countries a miserable place to live.



Expressing myself EVERY day - but especially on July 22, 2002!
Jaguar
Knackwurst








Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 198 days
Last activity: 198 days
#84 Posted on
Again, I never called America a terrorist state. What I'm saying is that our actions in regards to the invasion of Iraq are on par with terrorism.

-Jag

And why would I want to leave the country? I'd rather see the people responsible for this upcoming invasion leave first.



"You gotta hate somebody before this is over. Them, me, it doesn't matter."

"Hate, who do I hate? You tell me."

"Who do you love?"

-Wintermute to Case in William Gibson's Neuromancer
vsp
Andouille








Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 3033 days
Last activity: 247 days
#85 Posted on

    Originally posted by Jaguar
    And why would I want to leave the country? I'd rather see the people responsible for this upcoming invasion leave first.


The "love it or leave it" fallacy leaves out two key facts:

* it's much easier to work for change and throw the bums out from the INSIDE than from another country, and

* there is no place on the planet safe from American aggression, should America's government and military turn their sincere interest that way. Where could those in opposition run to?




"No society has managed to invest more time and energy in the perpetuation of the fiction that it is _moral, sane and wholesome_ than our current crop of _Modern Americans_."
-- Frank Zappa
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 12 days
AIM:  
#86 Posted on
I actually do love this country. You love the flag and our currency. There's a world of difference.

EDIT: And there's nothing more detestable than when you right-wing assholes degenerate into that "git outta my country if you hates it so much" bullshit. This more patriotic than thou garbage you people, especially in the Administration, use to get your way is sickening and horribly anti-American - a hell of a lot moreso than organizing a protest against the White House or being opposed to a meaningless attention-distracting war, and if you can't follow that, why don't you get the fuck out of MY country?!

EDIT #2: Made it a bit nicer.

(edited by OlFuzzyBastard on 30.9.02 1616)

(edited by OlFuzzyBastard on 30.9.02 1617)


"The only difference between lilies and turds are those humankind have agreed upon, and I don't always agree."
---George Carlin

"Facts?! Aw, people can use facts to explain anything that's even remotely true!"
---Homer Simpson
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1269 days
Last activity: 1066 days
#87 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
I guess I'll never get through to you left-wing zealots...

I mean this is pathetic. Leftists are calling our country a terrorist state and I'M the bad guy.

Thank god I'm not a liberal. I'd probably kill myself in shame.

EDIT: And I'm STILL against the war.

(edited by Grimis on 30.9.02 1632)
skorpio17
Morcilla








Since: 11.7.02
From: New Jersey

Since last post: 2409 days
Last activity: 2409 days
#88 Posted on
This just in: Toricelli has quit the senate race due to his lack of ethics. I am happy and no longer feel the need to Torch the Torch.

In the future, when people want to talk about liberal vs. conservative, taxes, wars, pro/anti american views. I would suggest that they start their own topic instead of highjacking mine.

...shaking my head at the lack of ethics here on this message board regarding unrelated topics.
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 9 hours
#89 Posted on
The Democratic Party must have given him a nice watch and a couple new suits for this one. Hah! I kill me!



Expressing myself EVERY day - but especially on July 22, 2002!
Jaguar
Knackwurst








Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 198 days
Last activity: 198 days
#90 Posted on

    Originally posted by Grimis
    I guess I'll never get through to you left-wing zealots...

    I mean this is pathetic. Leftists are calling our country a terrorist state and I'M the bad guy.

    Thank god I'm not a liberal. I'd probably kill myself in shame.

    EDIT: And I'm STILL against the war.

    (edited by Grimis on 30.9.02 1632)



Grimis, do you even bother to read what I post? The only reason I ask is because if you did, you'd have probably read that first sentence. You know, the one that goes like, "Again, I never called America a terrorist state."

I even put it in bold this time. Maybe it will catch your attention.


-Jag

I originally wrote a lot more, but then I decided that maybe if I kept my post short, Grimis would actually read it.



"You gotta hate somebody before this is over. Them, me, it doesn't matter."

"Hate, who do I hate? You tell me."

"Who do you love?"

-Wintermute to Case in William Gibson's Neuromancer
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1269 days
Last activity: 1066 days
#91 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29

    Originally posted by Jaguar
    Grimis, do you even bother to read what I post? The only reason I ask is because if you did, you'd have probably read that first sentence. You know, the one that goes like, "Again, I never called America a terrorist state."




Yes, but your next sentence was...


    Originally posted by Jaguar
    What I'm saying is that our actions in regards to the invasion of Iraq are on par with terrorism.


Now...

I AGREE thatan invasion of Iraq at present is not a good idea. But I would never equate a telegraphed invasion with terrorism. Which is exactly what you did, no matter what your first sentence said. For example, f my first sentence was "I never said I would vote exclusively Republican" and my next "What I said was I wouldn't vote for a candidate not endorsed by the Republicans" then you would probably get the feeling that I was voting Republican.

Now back in reality...

As for Torch...the real questions are:

1) Who replaces him on the ticket?
2) Does it matter?

They better have a doozy. If it is Bradley or Lautenburg that would be a start. I wouldn't be surpised though if Jim McGreevy tries to weasel his way on there.
PalpatineW
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2830 days
Last activity: 2672 days
AIM:  
#92 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.44

    Originally Posted by MoeGates
    OK, I see you DID need to get another rant out of your system. Let me try again.

    Let's say you're completely in charge of the tax code and government spending. You cut all the spending you want to cut. The federal government now spends money only on what you think is necessary.

    Question a) Is this more than $1.00? Since you mentioned defense, courts, police, infrastructure, I'm guessing yes.

    if answer is yes:

    Question b) how would you personally go about getting that money? Lots of fees? A national sales tax? A flat tax? An income tax? An investment tax? A property tax? Tariffs and Duties? Some combination thereof? Tax the states and let them decide how to get the money? What?

    All I said is my priorities would be a) inheritance tax, b) investment/capital gains, c)income (This is also by no means complete, I haven't really thought about it that much. And I might change my mind later, I don't know), and as a general rules, I would tax non-earned income before earned income. This means everyone is getting a big old income tax cut in my plan, across the board.

    This has nothing to do with what levels the taxes would be at, or the size of the federal government, or what the Federal government spends or does not spend it's money on. Maybe I'd spend more than you. Maybe less. I don't know. I'm sure we's spend it in different ways. That's not what my post is about.



If that was a rant, I'll say it was a pretty tame one. I was really just trying to play devil's advocate with you there, because I think you're playing a very dicy game when you try to find an ethical justification for any tax system that doesn't charge a flat *rate.* Impractical, I know, but it's ethical. And I say it's ethical because everyone is paying the same price for the same service. Under our current system, the more money someone is making the more they're contributing to the country. It almost justifies corporate control of political parties, if you think of the country as a large corporation with shareholders...



Using a key to gouge expletives on another's vehicle is a sign of trust and friendship.
Jaguar
Knackwurst








Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 198 days
Last activity: 198 days
#93 Posted on
So Grimis you're saying that because we're telling them to their faces that we're preparing to blow them to bits makes it somehow better? I'm not sure I buy that. The only argument that works for me here is the Saddam/Weapons of mass destruction argument, but it seems pretty clear to me that this is not the reason we're going to invade. The fact that we're planning to invade without proper justification is just wrong. And to me (you may feel differently) getting people killed without justification is on par with terrorism.

-Jag





"You gotta hate somebody before this is over. Them, me, it doesn't matter."

"Hate, who do I hate? You tell me."

"Who do you love?"

-Wintermute to Case in William Gibson's Neuromancer
PalpatineW
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2830 days
Last activity: 2672 days
AIM:  
#94 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.44
More on the Torch:

Did anyone see or hear his speech in full? The only excerpt quoted in this CNN article is Torricelli pleading: "When did we stop being such an unforgiving people?"





Using a key to gouge expletives on another's vehicle is a sign of trust and friendship.
Bizzle Izzle
Bockwurst








Since: 26.6.02
From: New Jersey, USA

Since last post: 82 days
Last activity: 82 days
#95 Posted on

    Originally posted by PalpatineW
    More on the Torch:

    Did anyone see or hear his speech in full? The only excerpt quoted in this CNN article is Torricelli pleading: "When did we stop being such an unforgiving people?"




Ha! Well, I guess we never stopped since we are running his crooked ass out of office. It's not often I get to say I am proud of New Jersey, but with the drop in the polls that forced this guy out, I can hold my head high!




Maiden RULES!!!

Sure I've got a permit. It's called the Second Amendment.
-- Ted Nugent on Gun Control
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1269 days
Last activity: 1066 days
#96 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
The amazing thing about Torch dropping out was that he says he did it because he couldn't get his message out, therefore he didn't want to cost the Dems the Senate! Not because people are tired of his charade!

God he's more of a tool than I thought.

BTW, memo to Torch: When being a corrupt goober and quitting the race, name-dropping that Bill Clinton tried to get you to stay in may not be the most intelligent maneuver...
PalpatineW
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2830 days
Last activity: 2672 days
AIM:  
#97 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.44
Again back to the Torch...

Despite the fact that, legally, they can't nominate ANYONE else, the Dems. have still tapped Frank Lautenberg. I can't believe they're going to take this to the supreme court, using a case in which someone *died* as a precedent. Bad poll numbers are not the same thing as death. If this even goes through... Just plain disgusting.



Using a key to gouge expletives on another's vehicle is a sign of trust and friendship.
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1269 days
Last activity: 1066 days
#98 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
If it does go through, the rule of election law will be corrupted forever. This is not like Florida where there were oodles of ambiguity. The law is clear and he should not be allowed off the ballot. The GOP does make a good case involving the absentee ballots of those who have already voted.

In a related story, the late Patsy Mink(D-HI) who passed away over the weekend only two days after the withdrawl date will remain on the ballot.
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 9 hours
#99 Posted on
Let's let the New Jersey courts figure this one out, not a wrestling message board. I have no idea if it's legal or not, but I know enough to know that I have no idea.

As for Mink, it's not a related story. Different states have different election laws.



Expressing myself EVERY day - but especially on July 22, 2002!
cranlsn
Liverwurst








Since: 18.3.02
From: Sussex, WI

Since last post: 13 days
Last activity: 14 hours
#100 Posted on

    Originally posted by MoeGates
    Let's let the New Jersey courts figure this one out, not a wrestling message board. I have no idea if it's legal or not, but I know enough to know that I have no idea.

    As for Mink, it's not a related story. Different states have different election laws.



We're definitely not going to decide it, but I see nothing wrong with debating it.

I DO know enough to know that at present it IS illegal. The dems have got the O.K. to go to the NJ high courts bypassing the lower court systems, due to the impending election date.

Now...if the NJ Supreme court allows this it creates a dangerous precedent for elections everywhere, from either party. Whenever a candidate is losing badly in the polls, he could "honorably" remove himself from the election for whatever reason, and allow a replacement that is both popular and unscathed by campaign mud slinging to enter the race at a late date.

Toricelli had a chance to remove himself from the election before this deadline, and only now wants out. The Dems do have an alternative. They can publicize the fact that, if elected, Torch wouldn't serve. Once elected and then resigned, NJ's democrat governor would be able to name a replacement. This scenario IS legal under current NJ election laws.

So...we'll see how this all shakes out in the courts.

jmodo



Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 NextThread ahead: Um...
Next thread: Hitchens to leave The Nation
Previous thread: Reorganize the U.N.
(2454 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
... so the family has been on Wife Swap two times and according to this article Click Here (msnbc.msn.com)
The W - Current Events & Politics - Torch the Torch (Page 5)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.164 seconds.