Liberals in charge? Does it ever work?

[PalmBeachSooner1]

Pick any major city in the country that is run by leftists. D.C, Philly, NY (it took a Republican to clean it up) Detroit, LA, New Orleans, etc....

They are all poor and have high crime rates. Does this sound like what you'd want to run the ENTIRE country?

Get ready for the entire country to look like New Orleans.

"Change"

[SoonerStormchaser]

Dude...I dislike BHO as much as the next guy, but c'mon! Enough already.

[SoonerInKCMO]

Seattle, San Francisco, Minneapolis, Portland, etc....

[PalmBeachSooner1]

Dude...I dislike BHO as much as the next guy, but c'mon! Enough already.

Fair 'nuff. I'm just saying one party in total control is not healthy no matter which side has it. It only invites more corruption.

[Vaevictis]

Fair 'nuff. I'm just saying one party in total control is not healthy no matter which side has it. It only invites more corruption.

Maybe that's what you intended to say. It's certainly not what you actually said.

[SoonerStormchaser]

And that's why the ship will be righted in two more years...remember the Clinton's getting their asses handed to them in the '94 elections?

[Vaevictis]

And that's why the ship will be righted in two more years...remember the Clinton's getting their asses handed to them in the '94 elections?

We'll see. The American public put up with Republican control for 3 Congressional election cycles.

All it took is some kind of crisis, right? Do you really think that (1) Obama's administration won't have some kind of crisis, and (2) if it doesn't, Obama's administration is incapable of making one up?

[PalmBeachSooner1]

Maybe that's what you intended to say. It's certainly not what you actually said.

Libs have complete control in those cities. If you don't want to see my point than I can't be more clear.

[SoonerStormchaser]

Well well well...look who got hammered?

[Vaevictis]

Libs have complete control in those cities. If you don't want to see my point than I can't be more clear.

I see your point. I agree with your point wrt one party being in charge of everything.

I disagree that your initial statements are actually making that point.

[soonerhubs]

I have to agree that you didn't make that point in your initial post. Feel free to edit it and admit the mistake.

[PalmBeachSooner1]

Well well well...look who got hammered?

That just forced me to never donate a penny around here.

[LosAngelesSooner]

Pick any major city in the country that is run by leftists. D.C, Philly, NY (it took a Republican to clean it up) Detroit, LA, New Orleans, etc....

They are all poor and have high crime rates. Does this sound like what you'd want to run the ENTIRE country?

Get ready for the entire country to look like New Orleans.

"Change"Shows how little you know.

L.A. is a frickin' AWESOME city to live in.

Where do you live, oh Worldly One? :rolleyes:

[LosAngelesSooner]

That just forced me to never donate a penny around here.OMG. The Troll won't contribute.

Shut the site down, Phil. :rolleyes:

[John Kochtoston]

Shows how little you know.

L.A. is a frickin' AWESOME city to live in.

Where do you live, oh Worldly One? :rolleyes:

D.C.'s pretty nice, too.

[LosAngelesSooner]

D.C.'s pretty nice, too.Yep. DC is awesome.

[Big Red Ron]

LA is a sh!thole. There's a couple of nice areas around it but LA's crap.

[PalmBeachSooner1]

OMG. The Troll won't contribute.

Shut the site down, Phil. :rolleyes:

I live in Palm Beach County, Florida. A sick haven for the ultra left who can't figure out a ballot, of course us Repubs never had a hard time with it.

[LosAngelesSooner]

I'm glad I'm ignoring BRR. :)

[LosAngelesSooner]

I live in Palm Beach County, Florida. A sick haven for the ultra left who can't figure out a ballot, of course us Repubs never had a hard time with it.Really?

Because in another post in another thread, which you made only 5 minutes ago, you said you lived in Edmond.

http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2462896&postcount=114

A great post from a fellow Edmond citizen. Well said!!
Which one is it, Troll?

[PalmBeachSooner1]

Really?

Because in another post in another thread, which you made only 5 minutes ago, you said you lived in Edmond, Troll.

I'm orig FROM Edmond. Memorial Class of 95. I've lived here since '99.

[Big Red Ron]

For those of you that haven't been paying attention.



This message is hidden because LosAngelesSooner is on your ignore list (http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/profile.php?do=editlist).
I'm sure the "Worldly" dude from "LA" has tried his best to defend his adopted city or just attacked me personally but I prefer it this way. Not listing to stupid people is good.

[PalmBeachSooner1]

mapquest me "pal"

424 Northlake court
North palm beach, fl 33408

[tommieharris91]

For those of you that haven't been paying attention.

I'm sure the "Worldly" dude from "LA" has tried his best to defend his adopted city or just attacked me personally but I prefer it this way. Not listing to stupid people is good.

Nah, all he said was you were on ignore too.

[My Opinion Matters]

Thanks, if I could have your SSN now I'll complete your order.

[Frozen Sooner]

For two people who have each other on ignore, they spend a lot of time talking about each other.

[soonerhubs]

mapquest me "pal"

424 Northlake court
North palm beach, fl 33408

Nope, too far from Disneyworld for me to come visit, but we can hang out at Epcot if you like. :D

[PalmBeachSooner1]

Nope, too far from Disneyworld for me to come visit, but we can hang out at Epcot if you like. :D

I've got the pad if we get to the Orange Bowl.

Why am I red again? WTF

[SoonerStormchaser]

Ok boys...time to lock this one down.

[Frozen Sooner]

I think it can be said that the last eight years pretty definitively show that having "conservatives" in charge doesn't work out so hot...

[soonerhubs]

I've got the pad if we get to the Orange Bowl.

Fair enough!

LAS does this mean I can't come over if we go to the Rose Bowl? :O

[Frozen Sooner]

Oh, and with Mark Begich as Mayor of Anchorage (putatively a non-partisan office, but Mark's running for the US Senate right now as a Democrat and his father was a US Rep as a Democrat) the city has erased a multi-million dollar deficit, beefed up law enforcement, and built a shiny new convention center.

So, you know, there's a place where a liberal in charge did some good.

[LosAngelesSooner]

And, as I said, the "dirty Libz" in charge of LA have done a bang up job. This city is awesome to live in. That's why thousands of people move here every year. :)

[Frozen Sooner]

Well, yeah. From MEXICO! ;)

[LosAngelesSooner]

Fair enough!

LAS does this mean I can't come over if we go to the Rose Bowl? :O
Rose OR Holiday. (I've got a place in S.D., as well)

But realize that I'm a REAL person, so my homes are REAL. I can't speak for the imaginary person from Trollville, Florida. :D

[soonerhubs]

And, as I said, the "dirty Libz" in charge of LA have done a bang up job. This city is awesome to live in. That's why thousands of people move here every year. :)

We're actually heading out to Corona Del Mar in January. I personally love southern California (Not USC though.)

[LosAngelesSooner]

Well, yeah. From MEXICO! ;)HARUMPH...HARUMPH...HARUMPH!!!

[PalmBeachSooner1]

Rose OR Holiday. (I've got a place in S.D., as well)

But realize that I'm a REAL person, so my homes are REAL. I can't speak for the imaginary person from Trollville, Florida. :D

LOL. You think I'm some fake dude. I love it.

[LosAngelesSooner]

We're actually heading out to Corona Del Mar in January. I personally love southern California (Not USC though.)USC is poop.

[PalmBeachSooner1]

Being an objective person I believe that the answer to the original question is a resounding NO.

[My Opinion Matters]

Being an objective person I believe that the answer to the original question is a resounding NO.

Who's the objective person? You?

[LosAngelesSooner]

Being an objective person I believe that the answer to the original question is a resounding YES.Fixed.

[soonerhubs]

What was the original question? ;)

[Frozen Sooner]

As a totally objective person, I believe that the answer to the question of "should Meadow Soprano perform sexy hijinks on my body" is a resounding YES!

No amount of evidence presented to the contrary will change this logical and unbiased conclusion.

[PalmBeachSooner1]

Goodbye, I guess I post too much.

[Vaevictis]

As a totally objective person, I believe that the answer to the question of "should Meadow Soprano perform sexy hijinks on my body" is a resounding YES!

No amount of evidence presented to the contrary will change this logical and unbiased conclusion.

Even if she has vagina dentata and the herp?

[Frozen Sooner]

Even if she has vagina dentata and the herp?

Those two things are logically inconsistent with the concept of Meadow Soprano.

And yes.

[Vaevictis]

You sir, are a freaky, freaky man.

[A Sooner in Texas]

I think it can be said that the last eight years pretty definitively show that having "conservatives" in charge doesn't work out so hot...



Amen, brother. :D

[Curly Bill]

I think it can be said that the last eight years pretty definitively show that having "conservatives" in charge doesn't work out so hot...

This statement might be true...except for the fact that true "conservatives" have not been in charge the past eight years. I don't know what you'd call Bush, but a conservative he's not.

[Sooner_Havok]

This statement might be true...except for the fact that true "conservatives" have not been in charge the past eight years. I don't know what you'd call Bush, but a conservative he's not.

He fooled me once. :(

[Curly Bill]

He fooled me once. :(

Yup, me too...:(

[Frozen Sooner]

This statement might be true...except for the fact that true "conservatives" have not been in charge the past eight years. I don't know what you'd call Bush, but a conservative he's not.

Hence the quotes.

[Curly Bill]

Hence the quotes.

:O oops. :D

[JLEW1818]

Penalizing people for making too much money........ that is a joke. Obama is almost encouraging people not to reach for the stars.

OH well, Obama will win , screw the economy up , and then we wont have democrat for a long time!!!

[Curly Bill]

Penalizing people for making too much money........ that is a joke. Obama is almost encouraging people not to reach for the stars.

OH well, Obama will win , screw the economy up , and then we wont have democrat for a long time!!!


You give the American people too much credit my young friend. :D

[JLEW1818]

Yep people will realize how worthless he is. I'd like to see him give away all his money and make minimum wage for the next 4 years.

[Curly Bill]

Yep people will realize how worthless he is. I'd like to see him give away all his money and make minimum wage for the next 4 years.

...but they won't realize, if the American electorate had much of a clue we wouldn't be about to elect this guy in the first place.

[JLEW1818]

I wish it was up to soonerfans.com who gets in office!


I hate to admit it, but I think Obama is going to win. I feel sorry for him, who knows what will happen to him.

[Big Red Ron]

I think it can be said that the last eight years pretty definitively show that having "conservatives" in charge doesn't work out so hot...
Well, except "conservatives" haven't been in charge. Christian coalition Republicans have, there's a difference.

It's a somewhat uncomfortable compromise we had to make. Beat's government hand outs and gay pride parades.

[JLEW1818]

How bout people quit crying and work. If they cant afford for their family then don't have a family. It's not American peoples job to take care of other Americans. Shoot some of those "people" are not even citizens of this country.

[Frozen Sooner]

Well, except "conservatives" haven't been in charge. Christian coalition Republicans have, there's a difference.

It's a somewhat uncomfortable compromise we had to make. Beat's government hand outs and gay pride parades.

Is there some kind of overarching Republican problem with understanding what putting quotation marks around a word denotes?

[tommieharris91]

"No."

[Sooner_Havok]

"No."

"**** off dip ****"

:D

[leavingthezoo]

Penalizing people for making too much money........ that is a joke. Obama is almost encouraging people not to reach for the stars.

OH well, Obama will win , screw the economy up , and then we wont have democrat for a long time!!!

this might be the most perplexing thing i've read all day.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

this might be the most perplexing thing i've read all day.I would guess you weren't around for LBJ and Carter.

[Chuck Bao]

This whole thread is silly.

Do right wing religious policies ever work? I guess it worked for the Mayans until the Aztecs came along.

Strike that, the Mayans were pretty gay friendly so you can blame their downfall on too many gay pride parades.

[Sooner in Tampa]

I would guess you weren't around for LBJ and Carter.
For the un-informed...or those just too young to remember Carter


Economy: stagflation and the appointment of Volcker

During Carter's administration, the economy suffered double-digit inflation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation), coupled with very high interest rates, oil shortages, high unemployment and slow economic growth. Productivity growth in the United States had declined to an average annual rate of 1 percent, compared to 3.2 percent of the 1960s. There was also a growing federal budget deficit which increased to 66 billion dollars.
The 1970s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1970s#Economy_of_the_Seventies) are described as a period of stagflation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stagflation), as well as higher interest rates. Price inflation (a rise in the general level of prices) creates uncertainty in budgeting and planning and makes labor strikes for pay raises more likely.
In the wake of a cabinet shakeup in which Carter asked for the resignations of several cabinet members (see "Malaise speech" below), Carter appointed G. William Miller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._William_Miller) as Secretary of the Treasury (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_of_the_Treasury). Miller had been serving as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Board). To replace Miller, and in order to calm down the market, Carter appointed Paul Volcker (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Volcker) as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Board).[38] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter#cite_note-37) Volcker pursued a tight monetary policy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monetary_policy) to bring down inflation, which he considered his mandate. He succeeded, but only by first going through an unpleasant phase during which the economy slowed and unemployment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment) rose, prior to any relief from inflation.
Led by Volcker, the Federal Reserve (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve) raised the discount rate from 10 percent when Volcker assumed the chairmanship in August 1979 to 12 percent within two months.[39] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter#cite_note-38) The prime rate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_rate) hit 21.5 percent in December 1980, the highest rate in U.S. history under any President.[40] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter#cite_note-39) Investments in fixed income (both bonds (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bond_%28finance%29) and pensions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pension) being paid to retired (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retirement) people) were becoming less valuable. The high interest rates would lead to a sharp recession in the early 1980s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_1980s_recession).[41] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter#cite_note-40)


Wait for it...once BHO becomes president...this is our future!!!

And spare me the greatness of mr. clinton---he was the great benefactor of the dot com boom...he didn't anything to do with the economic boom of his presidency.

[Sooner in Tampa]

Oh...and for the record...LA is a crap hole. There are some VERY nice affluent areas, but the majority of the place sucks...traffic, crime, smog, fires, earthquakes, riots, corrupt police, and of course the overly large immigrant population sucking the life out of the public services.

[leavingthezoo]

I would guess you weren't around for LBJ and Carter.

true. but i'm perplexed because the yahoo implies the economy is not already screwed up to the nth degree. guess you weren't around for bush. ;)

[My Opinion Matters]

I would guess you weren't around for LBJ and Carter.

I like how you conveniently left out Clinton.

[Sooner in Tampa]

I like how you conveniently left out Clinton.
Clinton doesn't count...he was the biggest winner in the dot com boom (as mention before) as well as the fleecing of America in the Y2K scare.

[My Opinion Matters]

Clinton doesn't count

Of course he doesn't. I've been around long enough to know how this game works.

Bad things that happen under a Donk president=presidents fault.

Good things that happen under a Donk president=happened despite president.

Right?

[Chuck Bao]

Of course he doesn't. I've been around long enough to know how this game works.

Bad things that happen under a Donk president=presidents fault.

Good things that happen under a Donk president=happened despite president.

Right?

Don't forget about all the socialism and marxism and end of capitalism and public handouts and Robin Hood in green tights and stuff under a Democrat administration.

[Sooner in Tampa]

Of course he doesn't. I've been around long enough to know how this game works.

Bad things that happen under a Donk president=presidents fault.

Good things that happen under a Donk president=happened despite president.

Right?
Well...if you want to simplify it that way...go right ahead.

The President...Donk or Repub...get too much credit AND too much blame for economy. PERIOD.

[My Opinion Matters]

Well...if you want to simplify it that way...go right ahead.

The President...Donk or Repub...get too much credit AND too much blame for economy. PERIOD.

Simplifying things to irrational and illogical levels is my best attempt to think like you.

[Vaevictis]

For the un-informed...or those just too young to remember Carter

We had to study Vockler in an economics class.

(1) Yes, he triggered a recession.
(2) Yes, he triggered high interest rates.
(3) Yes, he broke the back of stagflation.

Sometimes the medicine that cures the disease tastes like ****.

[JohnnyMack]

Oh...and for the record...ANY CITY IN THE UNITED STATES is a crap hole. There are some VERY nice affluent areas, but the majority of the place sucks...traffic, crime, smog, fires, earthquakes, riots, corrupt police, and of course the overly large immigrant population sucking the life out of the public services.

Fixed it for ya.

[Sooner in Tampa]

Fixed it for ya.
Yeah that works :rolleyes:

[Scott D]

I live in Palm Beach County, Florida. A sick haven for the ultra left who can't figure out a ballot, of course us Repubs never had a hard time with it.

I'm curious why this idiot didn't insinuate that the problems in his current area of residency are because of the elderly and Jews. And then backtrack from it blaming it on a political party when he's called for being an idiot.

[tommieharris91]

I like how you conveniently left out Clinton.

As much as Clinton is responsible for the .com boom he is responsible for the .com crash.

[Stoop Dawg]

Clinton doesn't count...he was the biggest winner in the dot com boom (as mention before)

Clinton may have been the beneficiary of the dot-com boom, but at least he used the economic prosperity of the time to pay down the national deficit.

[tommieharris91]

We had to study Vockler in an economics class.

(1) Yes, he triggered a recession.
(2) Yes, he triggered high interest rates.
(3) Yes, he broke the back of stagflation.

Sometimes the medicine that cures the disease tastes like ****.

I'm pretty sure high interest rates back then was the cure.

[royalfan5]

I'm pretty sure high interest rates back then was the cure.

and they were raised under the leadership of Volcker.

[tommieharris91]

and they were raised under the leadership of Volcker.

Well, I wasn't trying to take anything away from the guy.

[JohnnyMack]

Yeah that works :rolleyes:

My wife used to live in Sarasota. I've been through your airport and your town on countless occasions. Gotten drunk at Ybor City, spent some money at International Plaza. Guess what? Tampa has plenty of ****ty parts. Just like Tulsa, LA or any of the other 30 or 40 cities I've traveled through in the last 10 years.

[Sooner in Tampa]

My wife used to live in Sarasota. I've been through your airport and your town on countless occasions. Gotten drunk at Ybor City, spent some money at International Plaza. Guess what? Tampa has plenty of ****ty parts. Just like Tulsa, LA or any of the other 30 or 40 cities I've traveled through in the last 10 years.
No doubt JM, not doubt. We do not have the same crime level, pollution, wildfires, immigration issues, earthquakes, or traffic problems as the aforementioned city.

EVERY single large metropolitan area in America has shady areas.

[LosAngelesSooner]

Penalizing people for making too much money........ that is a joke. Obama is almost encouraging people not to reach for the stars.
Really? Shoot for the starts? REALLY?! :rolleyes:


OH well, Obama will win , screw the economy up , and then we wont have democrat for a long time!!!Have you LOOKED out the window?!

[LosAngelesSooner]

Oh...and for the record...LA is a crap hole. There are some VERY nice affluent areas, but the majority of the place sucks...traffic, crime, smog, fires, earthquakes, riots, corrupt police, and of course the overly large immigrant population sucking the life out of the public services.LOL
I love it when people who don't live here tell me what it's like to live here. Ahhh ignorance is bliss, isn't it, Tampa? :D

Well, I'm gonna go grab Starbucks here in a second. I'd better be careful dodging all that traffic and crime and smog and fires and earthquakes and riots and corrupt police and immigrants. They're just everywhere. This place is the 7th level of Hell, I tell ya! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

But Tampa Bay...now THAT'S Heaven on Earth! :D:D:D

[LosAngelesSooner]

I hate to admit it, but I think Obama is going to win. I feel sorry for him, who knows what will happen to him.What EXACTLY are you insinuating here???


How bout people quit crying and work. If they cant afford for their family then don't have a family. It's not American peoples job to take care of other Americans. Shoot some of those "people" are not even citizens of this country.Quotes around the word PEOPLE. Are you now insinuating that some "people" are not people; that they're somehow "less than" you?

[Sooner in Tampa]

LOL
I love it when people who don't live here tell me what it's like to live here. Ahhh ignorance is bliss, isn't it, Tampa? :D

Well, I'm gonna go grab Starbucks here in a second. I'd better be careful dodging all that traffic and crime and smog and fires and earthquakes and riots and corrupt police and immigrants. They're just everywhere. This place is the 7th level of Hell, I tell ya! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

But Tampa Bay...now THAT'S Heaven on Earth! :D:D:D
You pompous ***...you act no one have ever been your fair city. I spent 10 years in So Cal and am quite familiar with LA. Been there MANY times. NEVER had the desire to move any closer to LA than Vista.

Just my opinion. and yes comparing LA to Tampa...Tampa is Heaven on earth.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Hello, Senor Highn'mighty. Welcome to the news.


What EXACTLY are you insinuating here???

This.

The plan was unveiled because of its sheer idiocy, in my opinion. (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081028/D943FNF80.html)

Not everyone of this slant is a purebred idiot. Foolish, misguided, and ignorant, yes. But not an idiot. Just like with arson investigation, you only catch the stupid ones.

[My Opinion Matters]

Really? Shoot for the starts? REALLY?! :rolleyes:

Have you LOOKED out the window?!

You're wasting your time, I don't think he's even old enough to vote.

[Vaevictis]

I'm pretty sure high interest rates back then was the cure.

Yeah, that was my point. Sooner in Tampa was talking about how Carter and Vockler did all these things and how horrible they were, and that's what it's going to be like under an Obama administration.

The fact is that Carter and Vockler did away with inflationary expectations which in turn killed stagflation and helped to set the stage for the economic resurgence of the 1980's. It hurt for awhile there, but like I said, sometimes the medicine that cures you isn't very pleasant.

In short, we'll be very fortunate if Obama does as good a job with the economy.

[PhiDeltBeers]

It seems some people on here don't make in the 250k per year range. Let me tell you...that ain't rich.

[Fraggle145]

It seems some people on here don't make in the 250k per year range. Let me tell you...that ain't rich.

Maybe not, but its a hell of a lot better than I'm doing now...:O

[JohnnyMack]

You pompous ***...you act no one have ever been your fair city. I spent 10 years in So Cal and am quite familiar with LA. Been there MANY times. NEVER had the desire to move any closer to LA than Vista.

Just my opinion. and yes comparing LA to Tampa...Tampa is Heaven on earth.

http://www.smithandassociates.com/property/property.asp?PRM_MLSNumber=T2321869&PRM_MlsName=midFLregional

This is in Tampa. Maybe not heaven on earth, but damn nice.

[PhiDeltBeers]

Let's just say I paid around 60k in taxes this year. I didn't even make 250K. So a guy that makes 250k could be paying around 100k in taxes with BO in office. Again, I'm just estimating numbers....That, my friends, is a lot of dough.

[mdklatt]

It seems some people on here don't make in the 250k per year range. Let me tell you...that ain't rich.

It is to 99% of the population....

[Sooner in Tampa]

http://www.smithandassociates.com/property/property.asp?PRM_MLSNumber=T2321869&PRM_MlsName=midFLregional

This is in Tampa. Maybe not heaven on earth, but damn nice.
That's my neighbors house ;)

[mdklatt]

Let's just say I paid around 60k in taxes this year. I didn't even make 250K. So a guy that makes 250k could be paying around 100k in taxes with BO in office. Again, I'm just estimating numbers....That, my friends, is a lot of dough.

You guys know what a marginal tax rate is, right? Obama wants to raise the marginal tax rate on income above $250,000 by 3%. If you make $300,000, your income tax will go up by a whopping $1500. Boo frickin' hoo.

[PhiDeltBeers]

And I believe I heard he dropped that to 200K over the weekend. How low can he go??!!

[PhiDeltBeers]

You guys know what a marginal tax rate is, right? Obama wants to raise the marginal tax rate on income above $250,000 by 3%. If you make $300,000, your income tax will go up by a whopping $1500. Boo frickin' hoo.

I'm not the smartest guy in the world (I'm no accountant either). But isn't 3% of 300k....9K or did I screw up somewhere. Not saying you're wrong, maybe I miscalculated??

[PhiDeltBeers]

You guys know what a marginal tax rate is, right? Obama wants to raise the marginal tax rate on income above $250,000 by 3%. If you make $300,000, your income tax will go up by a whopping $1500. Boo frickin' hoo.

Nevermind, I see what you did. You took the difference between 300k and 250k and took 3% of that. I on the same page.

[LosAngelesSooner]

You pompous ***...you act no one have ever been your fair city. I spent 10 years in So Cal and am quite familiar with LA. Been there MANY times. NEVER had the desire to move any closer to LA than Vista.

Just my opinion. and yes comparing LA to Tampa...Tampa is Heaven on earth.Ah, namecalling. The last resort of a weak mind... ;)

And I'm sure that 1960 Los Angeles was JUUUST like it is today. :D

Seriously, folks. LA is a nightmare. It's horrible. I don't know how I get through the day. Wait! What was that?! Oh, no...another SmogQuake...

[mdklatt]

I'm not the smartest guy in the world (I'm no accountant either). But isn't 3% of 300k....9K or did I screw up somewhere. Not saying you're wrong, maybe I miscalculated??

Nobody is taxed at a single rate. If the top tier starts at $250,000, you're only taxed at that rate for income in excess of $250,000. If the next tier down starts at $100,000, income between $100,000 and $250,000 is taxed at that rate, and so on. So if Joe The Republican Plant would really be making a net income of $280,000/year from a plumbing business, his extra tax bill under Obama's plan would be 3% of $30,000, or $900.

[PhiDeltBeers]

Nobody is taxed at a single rate. If the top tier starts at $250,000, you're only taxed at that rate for income in excess of $250,000. If the next tier down starts at $100,000, income between $100,000 and $250,000 is taxed at that rate, and so on. So if Joe The Republican Plant would really be making a net income of $280,000/year from a plumbing business, his extra tax bill under Obama's plan would be 3% of $30,000, or $900.

I'm so glad I have an accountant!

[soonerscuba]

I have a hard time feeling sorry for anybody paying a 100k of taxes a year, the median household income in this country is 45k. $250,000 is around 13k/month take home. It's a lot of money, more than about 98% of Americans make.

Also, if you are paying 100,000 in taxes, you should be making in the neighborhood of $400k-500k, depending on where you live and your investment structure.

[swardboy]

I have a hard time feeling sorry for anybody paying a 100k of taxes a year, the median household income in this country is 45k. $250,000 is around 13k/month take home. It's a lot of money, more than about 98% of Americans make.

Also, if you are paying 100,000 in taxes, you should be making in the neighborhood of $400k-500k, depending on where you live and your investment structure.

Hello.Class.Envy.

[soonerscuba]

Hello.Class.Envy.Not in the slightest, well, sort of, who doesn't want to be in a position to pay 100k in taxes? It's a good problem to have. Compared to similarly structured industrialized nations, America frankly has a very tax friendly society. The rich in Europe pay a 50% effective tax rate, something that would get a politician strung up here.

As it stands, I don't have a big problem with a slight increase in the top bracket, think that capital gains tax should be maintained or lowered, and that corporate rates should be lowered and have an increased regulatory role in passthrough income.

[Stoop Dawg]

I have a hard time feeling sorry for anybody paying a 100k of taxes a year, the median household income in this country is 45k. $250,000 is around 13k/month take home. It's a lot of money, more than about 98% of Americans make.

I don't think anyone making $250K/yr wants you to feel sorry for them. They just want you to recognize that that salary is earned with hard work.

My wife spent 8 years in school and another 2-3 years making just enough to get by. Meanwhile, she racked up significant debt in the form of student loans. Loans that we are *still* paying off. It took me 8 years to work my way up to $80K/yr and then I took an almost 50% pay cut when I changed jobs in the middle of the tech bust (2002). Six years later and I'm slowly getting back to where I was.

I could list off our assets (or lack thereof), but suffice it to say that we don't live a lifestyle that anyone would mistake for "rich". We both come from lower middle class families. We give money to our parents and siblings on a fairly regular basis.

Then along comes Obama. He wants to raise taxes on "rich" people with incomes over $250K/yr and he has the audacity to use terms like "fairness" when doing so. What, exactly, is "fair" about taking a disproportionate share of my income and giving it to someone who has worked half as hard (if that) in life?

No, I don't want pity. I want respect. Respect for the sacrifices I made in the past that put me in the position I'm in now. While the frat boys were out drinking and banging sorority chicks I was studying. While you (and I) were eating Thanksgiving dinner with your family my wife was on duty at the local hospital. Speaking of wives, instead of marrying some bimbo with a spending problem I married a woman with a career and ambition. It's all about choices. It's not like I just walked into a random office building one day and said "Hey, how about you give me a ridiculous amount of money for doing some trivially easy work?"

[Stoop Dawg]

who doesn't want to be in a position to pay 100k in taxes?

All of the people who don't want to put in the effort required to get there. :)

And yes, it's more difficult for some than for others.

[tommieharris91]

I don't think anyone making $250K/yr wants you to feel sorry for them. They just want you to recognize that that salary is earned with hard work.

My wife spent 8 years in school and another 2-3 years making just enough to get by. Meanwhile, she racked up significant debt in the form of student loans. Loans that we are *still* paying off. It took me 8 years to work my way up to $80K/yr and then I took an almost 50% pay cut when I changed jobs in the middle of the tech bust (2002). Six years later and I'm slowly getting back to where I was.

I could list off our assets (or lack thereof), but suffice it to say that we don't live a lifestyle that anyone would mistake for "rich". We both come from lower middle class families. We give money to our parents and siblings on a fairly regular basis.

Then along comes Obama. He wants to raise taxes on "rich" people with incomes over $250K/yr and he has the audacity to use terms like "fairness" when doing so. What, exactly, is "fair" about taking a disproportionate share of my income and giving it to someone who has worked half as hard (if that) in life?

No, I don't want pity. I want respect. Respect for the sacrifices I made in the past that put me in the position I'm in now. While the frat boys were out drinking and banging sorority chicks I was studying. While you (and I) were eating Thanksgiving dinner with your family my wife was on duty at the local hospital. Speaking of wives, instead of marrying some bimbo with a spending problem I married a woman with a career and ambition. It's all about choices. It's not like I just walked into a random office building one day and said "Hey, how about you give me a ridiculous amount of money for doing some trivially easy work?"

How do you really feel about it?

[Stoop Dawg]

How do you really feel about it?

I guess I'm just jealous of the frat boys who got to bang sorority chicks and I'm a little uptight about it. Sorry. :O

[Frozen Sooner]

I don't think anyone making $250K/yr wants you to feel sorry for them. They just want you to recognize that that salary is earned with hard work.

My wife spent 8 years in school and another 2-3 years making just enough to get by. Meanwhile, she racked up significant debt in the form of student loans. Loans that we are *still* paying off. It took me 8 years to work my way up to $80K/yr and then I took an almost 50% pay cut when I changed jobs in the middle of the tech bust (2002). Six years later and I'm slowly getting back to where I was.

I could list off our assets (or lack thereof), but suffice it to say that we don't live a lifestyle that anyone would mistake for "rich". We both come from lower middle class families. We give money to our parents and siblings on a fairly regular basis.

Then along comes Obama. He wants to raise taxes on "rich" people with incomes over $250K/yr and he has the audacity to use terms like "fairness" when doing so. What, exactly, is "fair" about taking a disproportionate share of my income and giving it to someone who has worked half as hard (if that) in life?

No, I don't want pity. I want respect. Respect for the sacrifices I made in the past that put me in the position I'm in now. While the frat boys were out drinking and banging sorority chicks I was studying. While you (and I) were eating Thanksgiving dinner with your family my wife was on duty at the local hospital. Speaking of wives, instead of marrying some bimbo with a spending problem I married a woman with a career and ambition. It's all about choices. It's not like I just walked into a random office building one day and said "Hey, how about you give me a ridiculous amount of money for doing some trivially easy work?"

I respect the hard work you've put in. You've obviously worked hard to get to a point in your life where you're financially comfortable.

Where your analysis goes off the rails a bit is that it assumes that anyone not in your position was a complete slacker or lazy. Not necessarily the case, and in fact probably not usually the case.

However, if it helps make you feel better about giving up some of your income to help pay for the functioning of our government, I'll see what I can do about getting some hot chicks to head over to your house.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

And once again, spin from the Obamanites about how it's okay to raise taxes.

One side blows and goes about how George W. Bush's spending policies are off the charts bad, bad, and more bad, but instead of REDUCING spending to compensate, REDUCING the tax burden regardless of upon whom it falls, let's tax a demonized income range with a arbitrary floor and blow the living shiite out of them.

We're helping the middle class! We're going after the rich and bloated!

That's beyond retarded. Howzabout not going after ANYBODY, cut spending to match established tax cuts, prioritize spending to necessary services like they have to do at the local level, and for ONCE, just ONCE, not pay for our own government's swollen toad of existence by punching Americans in the pocketbook, regardless of income level?

Is that so frickin' wrong? Christ Jesus have mercy. And you guys wonder why accusatory fingers are leveled at you backed by the cries of socialism, et cetera. The answer isn't a true definition of socialism and some high and mighty, grandiose display of your superior intelligence, the answer is to get your damn fingers out of my paycheck, Joe Workingman's paycheck, and even big money Bill Businessman's paycheck.

Period.

[Vaevictis]

Some of us remember that we had 90%+ tax rates on the top dollar from the end of WWII to the Kennedy administration.

I guess we were socialists then, huh.

[Vaevictis]

I guess I'm just jealous of the frat boys who got to bang sorority chicks and I'm a little uptight about it. Sorry. :O

Remember, these are sorority chicks.

If you've got money, you still can.

*zang*

[Frozen Sooner]

And once again, spin from the Obamanites about how it's okay to raise taxes.

One side blows and goes about how George W. Bush's spending policies are off the charts bad, bad, and more bad, but instead of REDUCING spending to compensate, REDUCING the tax burden regardless of upon whom it falls, let's tax a demonized income range with a arbitrary floor and blow the living shiite out of them.

We're helping the middle class! We're going after the rich and bloated!

That's beyond retarded. Howzabout not going after ANYBODY, cut spending to match established tax cuts, prioritize spending to necessary services like they have to do at the local level, and for ONCE, just ONCE, not pay for our own government's swollen toad of existence by punching Americans in the pocketbook, regardless of income level?

Is that so frickin' wrong? Christ Jesus have mercy. And you guys wonder why accusatory fingers are leveled at you backed by the cries of socialism, et cetera. The answer isn't a true definition of socialism and some high and mighty, grandiose display of your superior intelligence, the answer is to get your damn fingers out of my paycheck, Joe Workingman's paycheck, and even big money Bill Businessman's paycheck.

Period.

Howzabout we tax at a level that can maintain an adequate infrastructure?

The answer isn't a bunch of Republican talking points to demonstrate how well you fall into your party line, but PAYING FOR THE SERVICES WE GET.

Where in the hell do you think your fireman's paycheck comes from? That the money just magically appears from some leprechaun gold?

You're absolutely right that there's some programs that need cutting-but even cutting those programs won't solve the deficit issue. Even cutting every single earmark-which is the ONLY budget-balancing proposal I've heard from McCain-will save barely $18 billion a year-less than 20% of the annual deficit.

Meanwhile, the "socialists" :rolleyes: are the ones proposing PAYGO, where any increase in one area is matched by a cut elsewhere. You know, RESPONSIBLE budgeting.

Oh, I know, here comes the Laffer Curve bull****.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Just because history supports it doesn't make it right.

Once upon a time...

This one time, Pol Pot killed a bunch of Cambodians. Now you know!

And knowing is half the battle!

vvRCmdNtUqM

[Vaevictis]

Oh, I know, here comes the Laffer Curve bull****.

I hereby dub an analog for Godwin's Law; hence forth, Vaevictis' Law:

As any discussion about taxation levels grows longer, the probability of a bogus appeal to the Laffer Curve approaches one.

[Stoop Dawg]

Where your analysis goes off the rails a bit is that it assumes that anyone not in your position was a complete slacker or lazy. Not necessarily the case, and in fact probably not usually the case.

I'm sorry if I gave that impression. It wasn't my intention to disparage anyone else.

My point was really the opposite. It seems that people too often talk about people making $250K+ like they were born with a silver spoon in their mouth.

I do believe that one's income level is directly proportional to how "hard" one works in life. That's not to say that the same level of effort will always generate the same level of income. But more effort will always generate more income.

I have a lot to say about "hard work" and "effort", but suffice it to say that it's not enough to just do your job well. You also have to get along with others even if it's difficult to do so. A lot of people seem to have quit a bit of trouble doing that.

[soonerscuba]

Some of us remember that we had 90%+ tax rates on the top dollar from the end of WWII to the Kennedy administration.

I guess we were socialists then, huh.Now we have a dolt from Alaska telling us a 3-5% increase in marginal rates to 2% of the population is socialism. Fun times.

[Frozen Sooner]

Now we have a dolt from Alaska telling us a 3-5% increase in marginal rates to 2% of the population is socialism. Fun times.

I never said that.


;)

[Frozen Sooner]

Speaking of Laffer, he was on Maher's show last night.

That is one eerie looking d00d. Which has nothing to do with whether he's right or not, he just looks freaky.

[Stoop Dawg]

Howzabout we tax at a level that can maintain an adequate infrastructure?

Word.

And to be clear, since I've kind of "put myself out there", I'm not even necessarily opposed to our current progressive tax structure. What really gets under my skin is the lack of respect given to people who have worked their *** off to make a decent income. Say "I want to raise taxes on the kind people who worked their *** off to earn a decent income, and I thank them for it". Don't say "I want to raise taxes on the rich *******s who don't deserve the money they have".

[Vaevictis]

Eh, I'm sure Laffer's right to some extent.

There's at least one curve describing the relationship between taxation and revenues. And there's at least one point for which the relationship is maximized.

How many possible curves there are and how many maxima there are and what the **** it all looks like is anyone's guess.

[soonerscuba]

My point was really the opposite. It seems that people too often talk about people making $250K+ like they were born with a silver spoon in their mouth.My point is that the spoon in their mouth currently is probably silver relative to the vast majority of the population. It isn't fair, but if you have gov't expenditures that need to be reigned in, you go to where the tax money currently exists and allows for a set of people to be taxed within a very comfortable margin compared to their expenses. Like I said, it's a value judgment, so there isn't a "right" answer, but given the choice of increase revenues from all income brackets in this country, I think that the 250,000+ bracket is most prudent for modest increases.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Howzabout we tax at a level that can maintain an adequate infrastructure?

The answer isn't a bunch of Republican talking points to demonstrate how well you fall into your party line, but PAYING FOR THE SERVICES WE GET.

Where in the hell do you think your fireman's paycheck comes from? That the money just magically appears from some leprechaun gold?

Did you even read my post, Mike? It has jack squat to do with talking points. It has everything to do with, just like you said, taxation to the point of supporting and establishing basic, necessary services. You know dang good and well that we're blowing tax dollars like it was water at the federal level and regardless of how you may justify what expenditures are taking place, that's MY tax money. YOUR tax money. Money you and I made earning a paycheck. Not something to be toyed with lightly.

Speaking of leprechaun gold, thank you, Tulsa. For being small little irishmen that guard your hoards from everything but firemen. Give me a everloving break.


You're absolutely right that there's some programs that need cutting-but even cutting those programs won't solve the deficit issue. Even cutting every single earmark-which is the ONLY budget-balancing proposal I've heard from McCain-will save barely $18 billion a year-less than 20% of the annual deficit.

You missed the spending freeze position of Senator McCain, then. You're also ignoring cuts in existing federal spending, where the bloat resides. The DHS is an overburdened sow with the intent of universal approaches to emergency management. It's managed to hire thousands of federal employees, develop millions of dollars in cost overruns, all in an effort to "streamline" the process when the process was started as something as simple as a need to have consistent standards across emergency services. It's become a federal boat anchor, a swirling toilet of disappearing cash. That's the one I'm most familiar with, and if it got any fatter it'd explode. That's not cutting earmarks, that's cutting the hog itself. And THAT'S what we need.


Meanwhile, the "socialists" :rolleyes: are the ones proposing PAYGO, where any increase in one area is matched by a cut elsewhere. You know, RESPONSIBLE budgeting.

Oh, I know, here comes the Laffer Curve bull****.

I'm just a dumb ol' fireman. I don't know anything about the Laffer Curve. I ain't no big time banker or financial guru. Given that, I reckon I oughta just sit down and shut up and let you edumacated individuals take care of this, huh? It'd be RESPONSIBLE of me now, wouldn't it. Sit down and roll in my leprechaun gold.

[PhiDeltBeers]

I don't think anyone making $250K/yr wants you to feel sorry for them. They just want you to recognize that that salary is earned with hard work.

My wife spent 8 years in school and another 2-3 years making just enough to get by. Meanwhile, she racked up significant debt in the form of student loans. Loans that we are *still* paying off. It took me 8 years to work my way up to $80K/yr and then I took an almost 50% pay cut when I changed jobs in the middle of the tech bust (2002). Six years later and I'm slowly getting back to where I was.

I could list off our assets (or lack thereof), but suffice it to say that we don't live a lifestyle that anyone would mistake for "rich". We both come from lower middle class families. We give money to our parents and siblings on a fairly regular basis.

Then along comes Obama. He wants to raise taxes on "rich" people with incomes over $250K/yr and he has the audacity to use terms like "fairness" when doing so. What, exactly, is "fair" about taking a disproportionate share of my income and giving it to someone who has worked half as hard (if that) in life?

No, I don't want pity. I want respect. Respect for the sacrifices I made in the past that put me in the position I'm in now. While the frat boys were out drinking and banging sorority chicks I was studying. While you (and I) were eating Thanksgiving dinner with your family my wife was on duty at the local hospital. Speaking of wives, instead of marrying some bimbo with a spending problem I married a woman with a career and ambition. It's all about choices. It's not like I just walked into a random office building one day and said "Hey, how about you give me a ridiculous amount of money for doing some trivially easy work?"


I agree with everything you said except for the "frat" guy part!!! I was a "frat" guy.

[NYC Poke]

I make pretty good money. I'm not rich by any means, but I make a pretty good living. The last year my gf worked full time, she paid more in taxes than I made that year. The amount of her tax increase under the Obama proposal would be less than what she probably spends on artisanal cheese every year. Just sayin'.

[Frozen Sooner]

So you're saying that a "spending freeze"-that is, keeping spending at current levels which are already causing a deficit while handing out another massive tax cut is somehow a budget-balancing proposal? Particularly when said "spending freeze" doesn't include off-budget expenditures, like the $10 billion a month we're spending in Iraq.

And I'm glad that you recognize that the money that pays for your vital (truly, not being sarcastic at all) services comes from TAX DOLLARS. Yes, YOUR tax dollars (not mine, I don't live in Tulsa. :D)

We both agree that there are legitimate uses for tax dollars and legitimate reasons to collect taxes. Right now the federal budget is in a hole and we're deeply in debt. At some point we're going to have to pay that back. A blanket answer of "cutting spending" is just regurgitating talking points. Giving an example of wasteful spending (and you did a great job with DHS) isn't.

[PhiDeltBeers]

I agree with everything you said except for the "frat" guy part!!! I was a "frat" guy.

And so was the doctor that lives across the street from me!

[SoonerInKCMO]

I was thinking that the fireman was talking about the Department of Human Services... and I thought to myself "He's not making a damn bit of sense. :confused: "

I figured it out though. :)

[PhiDeltBeers]

I bet everyone agrees that we could beat this subject into about 100 pages of posts.

[Vaevictis]

So you're saying that a "spending freeze"-that is, keeping spending at current levels which are already causing a deficit while handing out another massive tax cut is somehow a budget-balancing proposal? Particularly when said "spending freeze" doesn't include off-budget expenditures, like the $10 billion a month we're spending in Iraq.

Nevermind what they've actually said is "spending freeze for all but the most vital functions." Care to take a guess as to what is included in the most vital functions? I'm betting it's more than you think.

[Stoop Dawg]

And so was the doctor that lives across the street from me!

Wait a minute! Nobody told me I could be a frat guy, bang sorority chicks, and make good money! :mad:

[PhiDeltBeers]

Wait a minute! Nobody told me I could be a frat guy, bang sorority chicks, and make good money! :mad:

Ding Ding Ding......The best of all worlds!!! Am I'm complaining about taxes! Maybe I should count my blessings. See Stoop Dawg, you have opened my eyes.

[stoopified]

For other liberals

[Scott D]

And once again, spin from the Obamanites about how it's okay to raise taxes.

Doesn't matter what side wins, both sides will raise taxes. It's how they can disguise the tax increases so that the average person doesn't realize they've had their taxes increased. I think a lot of the angst about raised taxes would probably triple if people saw where their tax dollars were already going.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Doesn't matter what side wins, both sides will raise taxes. It's how they can disguise the tax increases so that the average person doesn't realize they've had their taxes increased. I think a lot of the angst about raised taxes would probably triple if people saw where their tax dollars were already going.

Hence why I bang the table for spending cuts, not tax increases. Existing programs are swollen, puking, and fat, yet we still shell out billions and somehow, scratch our heads as a people and wonder why the deficit continues to skyrocket.

Raise taxes to fill the gap and you'll never see it again. Gone forever. And any cuts in taxes will be viewed by many, including myself, as a questionable decision when not backed by sufficient decreases in spending to compensate.

[A Sooner in Texas]

I'm sorry if I gave that impression. It wasn't my intention to disparage anyone else.

My point was really the opposite. It seems that people too often talk about people making $250K+ like they were born with a silver spoon in their mouth.

I do believe that one's income level is directly proportional to how "hard" one works in life. That's not to say that the same level of effort will always generate the same level of income. But more effort will always generate more income.

I have a lot to say about "hard work" and "effort", but suffice it to say that it's not enough to just do your job well. You also have to get along with others even if it's difficult to do so. A lot of people seem to have quit a bit of trouble doing that.


I work 50-60 hours a week and make not quite a fifth of that magic $250K. And I'm in middle management, so I've worked my way up by being very good at what I do and by being able to get along with others. I happen to like what I do...which is being a newspaper reporter and editor. OMG!!! LIBERAL MEDIA!!!!!! :D
Actually, small town conservative newspaper in probably the reddest county in Tejas. You see my avatar. Yet somehow I'm able to not write with a bias, even when interviewing any of the Republican officials here - which is all of them. :) In fact, I've been complimented a number of times by our U.S. Congressman for my accuracy and fairness. Yes, a Republican, and one I like and respect a great deal and will probably vote for even as I vote for Obama.

So I work as hard as anyone and don't make the money some people do. No complaints. I haven't gotten rich under Bush and I won't get rich under the next president. But I'll put my work ethic (and while raising two teenage sons by myself - one who is studying to be a CPA and the other who is studying to be a cop -pretty much by myself) against anyone's.

No class warfare propaganda coming from me. I'm as classy as they come. ;)

[Stoop Dawg]

Different jobs clearly pay different salaries. And different jobs require different kinds of commitments. You could probably double your salary by changing careers if you are willing to put in the time and do a job that you may not enjoy quite as much. On the other hand, if you like what you do and are satisfied with your salary, then absolutely don't do that. The choice is yours.

[leavingthezoo]

i want to make a kamillion dollars reading soonerfans. lord knows it doesn't pay enough now. :P

[Curly Bill]

Different jobs clearly pay different salaries. And different jobs require different kinds of commitments. You could probably double your salary by changing careers if you are willing to put in the time and do a job that you may not enjoy quite as much. On the other hand, if you like what you do and are satisfied with your salary, then absolutely don't do that. The choice is yours.

When Brack is elected I'm gonna choose to go on the public teet, I figure I'll come out ahead that way.

[Curly Bill]

i want to make a kamillion dollars reading soonerfans. lord knows it doesn't pay enough now. :P

I want to find a way to sleep and post at the same time. Right now one interferes with the other.

[Frozen Sooner]

When Brack is elected I'm gonna choose to go on the public teet, I figure I'll come out ahead that way.

Aren't you in education already?

;)

[Sooner in Tampa]

Ah, namecalling. The last resort of a weak mind... ;)

And I'm sure that 1960 Los Angeles was JUUUST like it is today. :D

Seriously, folks. LA is a nightmare. It's horrible. I don't know how I get through the day. Wait! What was that?! Oh, no...another SmogQuake...
Ah, age jokes...the last resort for unoriginal ;)

Dude...you enjoy the perfect life in LA (plastic abounds)...And the rest of us will enjoy our simple lives in America. :P

[LosAngelesSooner]

Ah, age jokes...the last resort for unoriginal ;)

Dude...you enjoy the perfect life in LA (plastic abounds)...And the rest of us will enjoy our simple lives in America. :PBuddy, I'm really not speaking ill of the rest of the U.S. There are some amazing places to live in our great nation. But I just think it's silly (and ignorant) when people express a blind hatred of Los Angeles and list off the reasons you gave. If you lived here, you'd understand WHY I think those reasons are silly.

And as for plastic, yeah, there are some girls who "get it done," but we also get the most naturally beautiful women from all over the world coming here every day. I ain't complaining.

And Florida ain't exactly want for plastic surgery. ;)

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Buddy, I'm really not speaking ill of the rest of the U.S. There are some amazing places to live in our great nation. But I just think it's silly (and ignorant) when people express a blind hatred of Los Angeles and list off the reasons you gave. If you lived here, you'd understand WHY I think those reasons are silly.

I intensely dislike L.A. because it's filled with frenchmen, heauxmeauxs, pompous wine snobs, and whores.

We should totally bomb L.A. with a big bomb thing.

[Big Red Ron]

Re: Liberals in charge? Does it ever work? Give me one example. There's your answer.

[soonerscuba]

Give me one example. There's your answer.I would say a 4 term liberal president who oversaw a depression, defeated Hitler, defeated Japan, and laid the groundwork for the atomic age was most certainly an abject failure.

[Big Red Ron]

I would say a 4 term liberal president who oversaw a depression, defeated Hitler, defeated Japan, and laid the groundwork for the atomic age was most certainly an abject failure.That was dern near 70 years ago. A different era, different circumstances. BTW - A lot of the financial problems we're having noe, can be traced back to the so called, "new deal."

[OklahomaTuba]

I would say a 4 term liberal president who oversaw a depression, defeated Hitler, defeated Japan, and laid the groundwork for the atomic age was most certainly an abject failure.

His economic policy, The New Deal, was a HUGE failure.

It prolonged the Great Depression for years.

It took the largest war in the history of mankind to fix the socialist agenda FDR imposed on the country. And yet, the libz dream of New Deal part II.

Crazy.

[OklahomaTuba]

Just have to say how Ironic it is for cuba to espouse how successful we were with the results of incinerating 100,000+ Japanese, yet thinks what we are doing in Iraq is just an immoral failure.

I wonder Cuba, do you think throwing all those Americans of Japanese decent into prison camps equal a success as well??

[soonerscuba]

That was dern near 70 years ago. A different era, different circumstances. BTW - A lot of the financial problems were having can be traced back to the so called, "Great Society."When you answer a question in absolute, you forfeit the right to provide qualifiers. If the question was, for example, name one time in the last 50 years that liberals have been effective, and I said JFK lowered taxes and provided a framework for the Peace Corp and NASA, you couldn't respond with the fact that it was 50 years ago because it matches the parameter of the original question. Lastly, you are expecting a perfect response in a universally imperfect system (i.e. government). So, it would be pure fallacy to say that Reagan, Lincoln, Polk, Washington, etc was perfect in their role as president, plus you are viewing them through the lens of history.

So, you are saying that FDR was not a good president, or that it was too long ago to count? And if it was too long ago, what is the parameter for an appropriate answer to the question, and why?

[OklahomaTuba]

Emperor Justinian was a flaming libtard.

Enough said.

[Big Red Ron]

When you answer a question in absolute, you forfeit the right to provide qualifiers. If the question was, for example, name one time in the last 50 years that liberals have been effective, and I said JFK lowered taxes and provided a framework for the Peace Corp and NASA, you couldn't respond with the fact that it was 50 years ago because it matches the parameter of the original question. Lastly, you are expecting a perfect response in a universally imperfect system (i.e. government). So, it would be pure fallacy to say that Reagan, Lincoln, Polk, Washington, etc was perfect in their role as president, plus you are viewing them through the lens of history.

So, you are saying that FDR was not a good president, or that it was too long ago to count? And if it was too long ago, what is the parameter for an appropriate answer to the question, and why?You realize JFK was more of a Republican than GWB, right? We weren't even speaking of him (not a liberal). We were talking about FDR who by all measure was an OK President. Like I said, we're still paying the bills on that and Social Security will not exist for you and me.

[soonerscuba]

Just have to say how Ironic it is for cuba to espouse how successful we were with the results of incinerating 100,000+ Japanese, yet thinks what we are doing in Iraq is just an immoral failure.

I wonder Cuba, do you think throwing all those Americans of Japanese decent into prison camps equal a success as well??Heh. The fact that I view FDR as a successful president means I'm an advocate for Japanese internment? That's impressive, even for you. No, I think that the internment was a travesty, and a black mark in American history, but I also think that it is possible to view his presidency as a success in the results that it eventually produced. You and I are going to disagree that tax cuts and deficit spending was the way out of the depression.

By your logic, everybody who wants to see a strict interpretation of the Constitution believes in slavery. It doesn't add up.

[Big Red Ron]

By your logic, everybody who wants to see a strict interpretation of the Constitution believes in slavery. It doesn't add up.That's just so simplistic, it's silly.

We are a Republic by constitution all rights not specifically granted to the Federal government is left to the States (read 10th amendment).

I think the current ruling in Roe v. Wade is absolutely wrong but I don't support making abortions illegal either. You getting any of this as it relates to the current state of affairs?

[soonerscuba]

You realize JFK was more of a Republican than GWB, right? We weren't even speaking of him (not a liberal). We were talking about FDR who by all measure was an OK President. Like I said, we're still paying the bills on that and Social Security will not exist for you and me.Once again, you provide qualifiers to a question that you don't set up in response, and I realize that you could do this all day, but it doesn't make you right. JFK is a Democratic icon (one that I happen to think is overrated), not a Republican one as a result of primarily the way he died (hence the overrated part), but also because of his stance of civil rights and expanded government civil service and technology. Also, I think a case could very easily be made that the Nixon's Southern Strategy would have employed after the Civil Rights Act, regardless as to whether it was JFK or LBJ that signed it.

I figured as a pollster you would realize that we are getting SS one way or another as a result of pandering to the most reliable voters in the country, old people.

[soonerscuba]

That's just so simplistic, it's silly.

We are a Republic by constitution all rights not specifically granted to the Federal government is left to the States (read 10th amendment).

I think the current ruling in Roe v. Wade is absolutely wrong but I don't support making abortions illegal either. You getting any of this as it relates to the current state of affairs?That was the point, Tuba said because I thought FDR was a good president, I was an advocate for Japanese internment. I provided an equally silly counterpoint to illustrate a point.

Also, a condescending attitude and red herrings won't help you prove that there has never been a successful liberal leader. I don't give a hoot about Roe v Wade as it doesn't relate to liberal executive power.

[LosAngelesSooner]

I intensely dislike L.A. because it's filled with frenchmen, heauxmeauxs, pompous wine snobs, and whores.

We should totally bomb L.A. with a big bomb thing.Oh, poop on your head, Breaux.

[Frozen Sooner]

That was the point, Tuba said because I thought FDR was a good president, I was an advocate for Japanese internment. I provided an equally silly counterpoint to illustrate a point.

Also, a condescending attitude and red herrings won't help you prove that there has never been a successful liberal leader. I don't give a hoot about Roe v Wade as it doesn't relate to liberal executive power.

Actually, he said that you advocated for Japanese incineration, not internment. Like what happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Which didn't actually happen under FDR, but whatever.

[soonerscuba]

Actually, he said that you advocated for Japanese incineration, not internment. Like what happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Which didn't actually happen under FDR, but whatever.He did bring up internment, which is what I addressed. As for Iraq, I think it's a failure and was bad allocation of treasury and lives, not an immoral failure, I would argue there is a distinct difference.

Plus, I wasn't going to walk down the rabbit-hole of the atomic bomb debate, I guess I should have been more clear that I was referring to civilian framework of atomic power.

[Frozen Sooner]

If you look at the specific quote you responded to, he said "incineration" not "internment."

[SicEmBaylor]

I weep for the Republic.

[soonerscuba]

If you look at the specific quote you responded to, he said "incineration" not "internment."I know, I did a bad job of separating the terms and lunacy for which he was accusing me.

For clarity:

Atomic bomb on Japan; tragic but necessary, IMO.
American internment of Japanese: simply tragic.

[soonerscuba]

I weep for the Republic.Why? Your ilk has the greatest possible benefit from an Obama failure. I think that the libertarian movement will be definitive in a few decades, it's all the appealing parts of the Republican Party minus the religious right, what's not to like if that's your bag?

[SicEmBaylor]

I know, I did a bad job of separating the terms and lunacy for which he was accusing me.

For clarity:

Atomic bomb on Japan; tragic but necessary, IMO.
American internment of Japanese: simply tragic.

Why is the atomic bomb being dropped on Japan a tragedy? The only thing tragic was Japanese behavior during the war. The internment of American citizens was totally tragic, unconstitutional, and inexcusable. The internment of any non-citizen Japanese people was totally justified.

Anyway, we should have dropped #3 for good measure.

[SicEmBaylor]

Why? Your ilk has the greatest possible benefit from an Obama failure. I think that the libertarian movement will be definitive in a few decades, it's all the appealing parts of the Republican Party minus the religious right, what's not to like if that's your bag?

I agree with all that. My statement was a broad generality and not tied to any specific argument in this thread.

[soonerscuba]

Why is the atomic bomb being dropped on Japan a tragedy? The only thing tragic was Japanese behavior during the war. The internment of American citizens was totally tragic, unconstitutional, and inexcusable. The internment of any non-US Japanese citizens was totally justified.

Anyway, we should have dropped #3 for good measure.I would argue that anytime you use a government fund to intentionally kill hundreds of thousands of civilians, it's tragic. I think it was the right decision, but it's a sad state of human affairs that it had to come to that. Ditto Japanese behavior, which is why they had it coming in the first place.

Eh, I would say the internment of Japanese nationals is shaky, but understandable, especially during the time.

[SicEmBaylor]

I would argue that anytime you use a government fund to intentionally kill hundreds of thousands of civilians, it's tragic. I think it was the right decision, but it's a sad state of human affairs that it had to come to that. Ditto Japanese behavior, which is why they had it coming in the first place.

Eh, I would say the internment of Japanese nationals is shaky, but understandable, especially during the time.

There were no "civilians" among the Japanese population. Every single one of them was a potential and likely combatant in any invasion. They had a cottage industry of sharpening sticks to use as spears and hid them under the floorboards of their homes. They were training kids how to blow up a tank. They had every man, woman, and child on the Japanese islands prepared to fight to the death and they were all psychologically programmed to do so.

I'm actually not a fan of this modern concept of war that says the political leadership is solely responsible and the civilian population should be treated with kid gloves. The blood of WWII is on Japanese hands, and I wouldn't have exchanged one American combat death in an invasion for 10 million Japanese civilians.

I'm not arguing with you or anything -- I'm just trying to make my views on the subject quite clear.

[Vaevictis]

We are a Republic by constitution all rights not specifically granted to the Federal government is left to the States (read 10th amendment).

10th Amendment reserves powers, not rights, to the States or to the people.

The 9th Amendment explicitly states that a lack of enumeration of a right does not imply that the right doesn't exist.

[LosAngelesSooner]

I weep for the Republic.Quotes like this are fun to say.

Silly. But fun to say.

[Frozen Sooner]

[QUOTE=SicEmBaylor;2465224]I'm actually not a fan of this modern concept of war that says the political leadership is solely responsible and the civilian population should be treated with kid gloves.QUOTE]

This is hardly a "modern" concept as it dates back at least to Thomas of Aquinas.

In fact, the concept of "total" war waged against an entire populace is a fairly recent development (with a couple of notable exceptions such as Carthage.)

[Scott D]

There were no "civilians" among the Japanese population. Every single one of them was a potential and likely combatant in any invasion. They had a cottage industry of sharpening sticks to use as spears and hid them under the floorboards of their homes. They were training kids how to blow up a tank. They had every man, woman, and child on the Japanese islands prepared to fight to the death and they were all psychologically programmed to do so.

I'm actually not a fan of this modern concept of war that says the political leadership is solely responsible and the civilian population should be treated with kid gloves. The blood of WWII is on Japanese hands, and I wouldn't have exchanged one American combat death in an invasion for 10 million Japanese civilians.

I'm not arguing with you or anything -- I'm just trying to make my views on the subject quite clear.

they're talking about interment foolish boy.

[Big Red Ron]

10th Amendment reserves powers, not rights, to the States or to the people.

The 9th Amendment explicitly states that a lack of enumeration of a right does not imply that the right doesn't exist.The power to control the individual is left to the states. Meaning, Roe v Wade will be overturned eventually. And as it should be, left to the states to decide the legality of abortions.

[Vaevictis]

The power to control the individual is left to the states. Meaning, Roe v Wade will be overturned eventually. And as it should be, left to the states to decide the legality of abortions.

... until you bring in the 14th amendment, which states, "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States (...)"

As such, a State cannot make or enforce laws which interfere with citizen rights assured by the US Constitution, which itself states in the 9th amendment that a lack of enumeration doesn't mean the right doesn't exist. And judges have used it to find rights other than the right to privacy that gave rise to Roe v. Wade. Example: the right to marry someone of another race.

[Sooner in Tampa]

Buddy, I'm really not speaking ill of the rest of the U.S. There are some amazing places to live in our great nation. But I just think it's silly (and ignorant) when people express a blind hatred of Los Angeles and list off the reasons you gave. If you lived here, you'd understand WHY I think those reasons are silly.

And as for plastic, yeah, there are some girls who "get it done," but we also get the most naturally beautiful women from all over the world coming here every day. I ain't complaining.

And Florida ain't exactly want for plastic surgery. ;)
LAS, we will just have to agree to disagree. I lived in So Cal during some pretty effed up times...i.e. good sized earthquakes, the Riots, floods, and several fires. The traffic in that area is borderline unbearable, and it seems to have gotten worse. I-5 and the 405 are just really big parking lots. My general disdain is for the entire So Cal area and the mentality that permeates from there. I am glad the you like it, it good to see civic pride.

[TUSooner]

It's just plain ****ing STUPID to say New Orleans is run by "liberals," which also happens to discredit your whole noisy stinking argument. Ray Nagin ran and was elected twice as a pro-business guy. He just happened to be inept. Then rest of this city's problems are not the result of "liberal" gubment- and, btw, what exactly the *** do you mean by "liberal" anyway. I know: it's just more contrived Right Wing Radio cant, mindlessly regurgitated in accordance with RWR dogma. Most of this city's problems arise form a culture of corruption and the endemic idiocy of citizens and government officials, including "conservatives" like Derrick Shepard and Oliver Thomas. And if you don't know who those people are, then why the *** are you talking about New Orleans ?! :mad: And you know what else? This city is STILL a bitchin place to live, problems and all.