|
Author
|
Topic: WHO VOTED FOR THIS GUY? LOL
|
N8
¯
Member # 6048
|
posted
 
 
Not to side track but I will...lol.
On my way back from San Diego I was on the plane with a Marine and a contractor (who fixes damaged tanks) that are stationed in Iraq. And they actually painted a whole different picture of what is going on over there. Basically to sum it up, they told me that overall they (soldiers) feel we need to be there. And by them occupying the terrorist time over there is keeping things safer over here. Also they said we are doig more good than harm over there, just the war isnt being executed efficiently and the enemy is so elusive. Soon as we pull out leaving a festering sore. The attacks over will come in flurries, they said. I asked them, who would they vote for and both said McCain because this war needs finishing. Not just a pull out. We discussed other things but that is a high level summary. It was probably one of the most interesting conversations I have had in quite sometime.
Dunno why I felt compelled to say this, and I will never vote Republican. But I found it interesting the contrast of opinion between what we are fed and from someone who is living it.
Posts: 11638 | Registered: Sep 2005
| :
|
|
BCINGUU
¯
Member # 2397
|
posted
This is probably pointing out the obvious, but the Iraq war and reconstruction are costing this country billions. Like it or not, that's coming out of your taxes one way or another. So it's not really possible to be for the war, and against more taxes. TANSTAAFL.
--------------------
93 Cobra #4563 347ci 12.0@118 505rwhp 524tq
90 GT "Saleen Cobra" style convertible 347ci
67 GT "Eleanor" style coupe 347ci
Posts: 1425 | From: San Jose, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| :
|
|
Chris C.
¯
Member # 1949
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by N8:
Not to side track but I will...lol.
On my way back from San Diego I was on the plane with a Marine and a contractor (who fixes damaged tanks) that are stationed in Iraq. And they actually painted a whole different picture of what is going on over there. Basically to sum it up, they told me that overall they (soldiers) feel we need to be there. And by them occupying the terrorist time over there is keeping things safer over here. Also they said we are doig more good than harm over there, just the war isnt being executed efficiently and the enemy is so elusive. Soon as we pull out leaving a festering sore. The attacks over will come in flurries, they said. I asked them, who would they vote for and both said McCain because this war needs finishing. Not just a pull out. We discussed other things but that is a high level summary. It was probably one of the most interesting conversations I have had in quite sometime.
Dunno why I felt compelled to say this, and I will never vote Republican. But I found it interesting the contrast of opinion between what we are fed and from someone who is living it.
U are right... My really good friend, severed 3 tours in Iraq (shot twice), and had another serve one they both got out last year. They pretty much said the same thing.
I figure its best to try to eliminate the prob over there, than have them come here and try to fix it then.
Chris
--------------------
-1990 Coupe
Posts: 636 | From: San Jose, Ca | Registered: Oct 2002
| :
|
|
SEMPERFI510
¯
Member # 627
|
posted
Iraq is a volitile place at this time and an instant pullout would be disastrous. I think a gradual withdrawal is appropriate. I agree the war is costing us an immense amount of money though...
Posts: 1766 | From: San Francisco, CA | Registered: Dec 2001
| :
|
|
KINGROY
¯
Member # 7736
|
posted
I hear what you guys are saying about what some Marines and Soldiers may have told you. Well listen to what this former Sailor/Marine Corps Medic AKA Corpsman AKA DOC is telling you. As a medic attached to the Marines, we hear everything. We hear their problems, help heal their injuries, and lift their spirits. When you have to stand suicide watch because a Marine wants to kill himself because he just lost his battle buddy you might understand. Or when you go to 10+ memorials of your fellow Marines and Sailors in under a year then you might understand or when you loose a fellow sailor to an IED 33 days before we go home you might see where I'm coming from. I speak from experience, not FOX news. Don't take all 100% from someone who sat next to you on the plane. Because I'll tell you right now, I probably would have said the same thing. We(military personnel) are trained not to down talk the war in public because we don't know who we are talking to.
I support our troops. I disagree with this war. It is a good that we are doing, but the consequences out weigh the benefits.
--------------------
2003 Cobra Vert
2005 Prius
Posts: 1642 | From: Vallejo, CA | Registered: Jun 2007
| :
|
|
stangless
¯
Member # 1414
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by kingroy:
I hear what you guys are saying about what some Marines and Soldiers may have told you. Well listen to what this former Sailor/Marine Corps Medic AKA Corpsman AKA DOC is telling you. As a medic attached to the Marines, we hear everything. We hear their problems, help heal their injuries, and lift their spirits. When you have to stand suicide watch because a Marine wants to kill himself because he just lost his battle buddy you might understand. Or when you go to 10+ memorials of your fellow Marines and Sailors in under a year then you might understand or when you loose a fellow sailor to an IED 33 days before we go home you might see where I'm coming from. I speak from experience, not FOX news. Don't take all 100% from someone who sat next to you on the plane. Because I'll tell you right now, I probably would have said the same thing. We(military personnel) are trained not to down talk the war in public because we don't know who we are talking to.
I support our troops. I disagree with this war. It is a good that we are doing, but the consequences out weigh the benefits.
i don't think any marine or military personal will ever tell you (out in the open) that this war is unfair and they want out.
--------------------
=(
Posts: 4634 | From: bay | Registered: Jun 2002
| :
|
|
75 chevy
¯
Member # 6717
|
posted
My point is: that I was being paranoid about the name. Sounding like the taliban leader. Kinda scary.
The man himself..obama whatever...guy, seems cool. I get a soothing sense when he speaks. I think he should change his name. Just "Barrack" Like "Prince", or "Elvis". I even like the name Will Smith. Just not Obama.
--------------------
2009 prius
1975 monza
Posts: 1917 | From: california | Registered: Apr 2006
| :
|
|
stangless
¯
Member # 1414
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by gt from 650:
My point is: that I was being paranoid about the name. Sounding like the taliban leader. Kinda scary.
The man himself..obama whatever...guy, seems cool. I get a soothing sense when he speaks. I think he should change his name. Just "Barrack" Like "Prince", or "Elvis". I even like the name Will Smith. Just not Obama.
sorry man, but judging someone on what his name sounds like is almost as bad as owning a v6 camaro.
--------------------
=(
Posts: 4634 | From: bay | Registered: Jun 2002
| :
|
|
75 chevy
¯
Member # 6717
|
posted
come on...
If his name was "Hitler Bin Laden". Would it be cool to have him as president. Its just a little freaky. Thats all.
I'm glad I posted this up. You guys are reassuring that Obama is a good guy. Makes me feel better about possibly voting for him.
--------------------
2009 prius
1975 monza
Posts: 1917 | From: california | Registered: Apr 2006
| :
|
|
stangless
¯
Member # 1414
|
posted
go buy "the audacity of hope" it's a good book. I started reading it a while back. it's got some decent ideas. It's not a manual to fixing America but hits the nail in the head at pointing out why we are the way we are.
or "Dreams of my father" he also wrote this long before he ran for president. it'll give you a different a perspective into his ideals.
--------------------
=(
Posts: 4634 | From: bay | Registered: Jun 2002
| :
|
|
Jdub07
( O Y O )
Member # 2728
|
posted
In regards to healthcare. My wife is diabetic and we also have two kids so you would think I'm all for free healthcare. Quite the opposite.
Who will it really be "free" to? Not me, not the guy next to me that works and pays into this so called free healthcare through outrageous taxing while some lowlife fucker that contributes nothing to the system, drains the system and is taken care of. Ummmmm FUCK THAT.
All these people out there that take advantage of the system just get that much more on us people that work our ass off. They want us to foot the bill. Damn right I'm greedy and want what I have and nope I don't want to share. There is no easy solution or answer to health care problems in America but don't come to ME looking for hand outs when me and my own family are doing our best to get by.
I don't expect anyone but me to take care of my family. If free healthcare does come to life it should be free to everyone meaning the general public and tax payers aren't being shafted to foot the fuckin bill. The word FREE is like the words love,never & guarantee...they are used all the time but rarely what they claim to be.
Who I voted for doesn't matter because no matter who is president healthcare is just used as part of their marketing campaigns. What would everyone say if a candidate didn't say one word about healthcare during their campaign? So you see thay HAVE to talk about it. They have to address everything even if just a little.
Something in an earlier post response I didn't understand, was that someone based their voting on past votes made by the current candidates. But in the same response they said all candidates are lyres so you can't base you vote on what they say. How does basing your vote on others votes make sense if those voters are basing their votes on what is said? Would that mean you actually basing your vote on what is said? Maybe I'm confused....if so sorry for not understanding correctly.
wow that was long. we all have a voice huh.
[ February 15, 2008, 07:01 PM: Message edited by: Jdub07 ]
Posts: 7282 | Registered: Apr 2003
| :
|
|
stangless
¯
Member # 1414
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jdub07:
In regards to healthcare. My wife is diabetic and we also have two kids so you would think I'm all for free healthcare. Quite the opposite.
Who will it really be "free" to? Not me, not the guy next to me that works and pays into this so called free healthcare through outrageous taxing while some lowlife fucker that contributes nothing to the system, drains the system and is taken care of. Ummmmm FUCK THAT.
All these people out there that take advantage of the system just get that much more on us people that work our ass off. They want us to foot the bill. Damn right I'm greedy and want what I have and nope I don't want to share. There is no easy solution or answer to health care problems in America but don't come to ME looking for hand outs when me and my own family are doing our best to get by.
I don't expect anyone but me to take care of my family. If free healthcare does come to life it should be free to everyone meaning the general public and tax payers aren't being shafted to foot the fuckin bill. The word FREE is like the words love,never & guarantee...they are used all the time but rarely what they claim to be.
Who I voted for doesn't matter because no matter who is president healthcare is just used as part of their marketing campaigns. What would everyone say if a candidate didn't say one work about healthcare during their campaign? So you see that HAVE to talk about it. They have to address everything even if just a little.
Something in an earlier post response I didn't understand, was that someone based their voting on past votes made by the current candidates. But in the same response they said all candidates are lyres so you can't base you vote on what they say. How does basing your vote on others votes make sense if those voters are basing their votes on what is said? Would that mean you actually basing your vote on what is said? Maybe I'm confused....if so sorry for not understanding correctly.
wow that was long. we all have a voice huh.
i totally understand your point. It's extremely valid.
There is NOTHING FREE in life. NOTHING.
However, it would not only be you, paying a little more for "better" healthcare. It'd be all of us.
People making over 200k would not get the tax breaks they get now (how did we ever approve this!) and contribute a little more.
It's a matter of getting all those "low life fucker(s) that -currently- drain the system" to contribute. Somehow. There are ways of doing just that but like you say there is no easy "quick" solution.
This is a question for everyone? are you guys happy with your current healthcare?
I'm not. I have medical insurance, but what it covers is so little that i pray to Gos (or whoever is willing to listen) i never get sick, cancer or any other terminal illnesses.
Every year i travel to peru where i get fully checked. Luckily i'm able to do that and still come out ahead after factoring in airfare etc. but what if i didn't have that option?
My mother was told that she had to take pills for life a few years ago to alleviate a chronic condition.
She went to Peru, had all the tests that "kaiser" refused to perform because "she was too young" to get them done. and shortly thereafter a treatment was implemented and she's healthy again. It's deplorable that the margin thing for cholesterol here (i don't know what that's called) has been raised, simply to not deal with having to treat patients!!
Our Health care system sucks for the majority of working people!. We certainly need to do something about it. what? i don't know... i'm not a politician.
--------------------
=(
Posts: 4634 | From: bay | Registered: Jun 2002
| :
|
|
AL STOCK
Its All Stock
Cuzzon
Member # 1852
|
posted
You guys are fucken politicians online hahaha i love reading these threads.. I vote for CAFORDS!!!!
--------------------
.:: FANATICS ::.
93 Cobra Teal
93 Cobra V Red
90 SSP
SVT Raptor
Huracan Rosso Mars
E63s W213 Selenite Gray
C7Z M7 Daytona Sunrise
Posts: 6498 | From: San Bruno | Registered: Sep 2002
| :
|
|
Wildfire532FB
CAFords OG
Member # 1482
|
posted
ELECTION 2008
Obama bill: $845 billion
more for global poverty
Democrat sponsors act OK'd by Senate panel
that would cost 0.7% of gross national product
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.p...w&pageId=56405
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: February 14, 2008
3:53 pm Eastern
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
Barak Obama
Sen. Barack Obama, perhaps giving America a preview of priorities he would pursue if elected president, is rejoicing over the Senate committee passage of a plan that could end up costing taxpayers billions of dollars in an attempt to reduce poverty in other nations.
The bill, called the Global Poverty Act, is the type of legislation, "We can – and must – make … a priority," said Obama, a co-sponsor.
It would demand that the president develop "and implement" a policy to "cut extreme global poverty in half by 2015 through aid, trade, debt relief" and other programs.
When word about what appears to be a massive new spending program started getting out, the reaction was immediate.
"It's not our job to cut global poverty," said one commenter on a Yahoo news forum. "These people need to learn how to fish themselves. If we keep throwing them fish, the fish will rot."
(Story continues below)
Many Americans were alerted to the legislation by a report from Cliff Kincaid at Accuracy in Media. He published a critique asserting that while the Global Poverty Act sounds nice, the adoption could "result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States" and would make levels "of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations."
He said the legislation, if approved, dedicates 0.7 percent of the U.S. gross national product to foreign aid, which over 13 years he said would amount to $845 billion "over and above what the U.S. already spends."
The plan passed the House in 2007 "because most members didn't realize what was in it," Kincaid reported. "Congressional sponsors have been careful not to calculate the amount of foreign aid spending that it would require."
A statement from Obama's office this week noted the support offered by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
"With billions of people living on just dollars a day around the world, global poverty remains one of the greatest challenges and tragedies the international community faces," Obama said. "It must be a priority of American foreign policy to commit to eliminating extreme poverty and ensuring every child has food, shelter, and clean drinking water. As we strive to rebuild America's standing in the world, this important bill will demonstrate our promise and commitment to those in the developing world.
"Our commitment to the global economy must extend beyond trade agreements that are more about increasing profits than about helping workers and small farmers everywhere," he continued.
The bill institutes the United Nations Millennium Summit goals as the benchmarks for U.S. spending.
"It is time the United States makes it a priority of our foreign policy to meet this goal and help those who are struggling day to day," a statement issued by supporters, including Obama, said.
Specifically, it would "declare" that the official U.S. policy is to eliminate global poverty, that the president is "required" to "develop and implement" a strategy to reach that goal and requires that the U.S. efforts be "specific and measurable."
Kincaid said that after cutting through all of the honorable-sounding goals in the plan, the bottom line is that the legislation would mandate the 0.7 percent of the U.S. GNP as "official development assistance."
"In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that (U.N.) declaration commits nations to banning 'small arms and light weapons' and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention of Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the Convention of the Rights of the Child," he said.
Those U.N. protocols would make U.S. law on issues ranging from the 2nd Amendment to energy usage and parental rights all subservient to United Nations whims.
Kincaid also reported Jeffrey Sachs, who runs the "Millennium Project," confirms a U.N. plan to force the U.S. to pay 0.7 percent of GNP would add about $65 billion a year to what the U.S. already donates overseas.
And the only way to raise that funding, Sachs confirms, "is through a global tax, preferably on carbon-emitting fossil fuels," Kincaid writes.
On the forum run by Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, one writer reported estimates of taxes from 35 cents to $1 dollar a gallon on gasoline would be needed.
"This is disgusting, sickening and angers me to the depths of my soul," the forum author wrote. "Obama wants us to support the world. I wonder how they intend to eliminate poverty. Most of the money always winds up in some dictator hands and in the U.N. coffers."
WND calls to Obama's office, as well as the offices of others who supported the plan, were not successful in obtaining a comment.
Another forum participant said, "Yes, and we should also eliminate sickness of any kind and get rid of poverty as well. Then, too, we should make certain that everyone in the world has equal assets, equal money, a college education, etc… After that, or maybe while we are solving all of the world's little problems, we can take care of the polar bears, eliminate the internal combustion engine, and, and, and… Oh dear, if only we would just go ahead and do all the things the dreamers want us to do. Let's stop using oil and burning coal while we're at it. Then we can make it illegal to be overweight and then we can. ..."
One forum contributor said since the legislation doesn't specifically demand "taxes," but instead leaves the mandatory "implementation" up to the president, "maybe the tooth fairy will leave [this new money] under the president's pillow."
Kincaid reported several more budget-minded senators have put a hold on the legislation "in order to prevent it from being rushed to the floor for a full Senate vote."
The legislation requires the president to do whatever is required to fulfill a strategy that would result in "the elimination of extreme global poverty and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide … who live on less than $1 per day."
It further requires the president not only to accomplish that goal but, "not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this act," to submit a report on "the contributions provided by the United States" toward poverty reduction.
--------------------
./_ _ _ ___ __\
(]]]_ _ o _ _[[[)
|\_o_ __ __o_/|
|__|..........|__|
68 Fastback
84 CJ7
94 HMMWV
95 GT
03 F350
17 Fusion Hybrid
Posts: 17578 | From: 530 | Registered: Jun 2002
| :
|
|
Wildfire532FB
CAFords OG
Member # 1482
|
posted
So he supports individual gun rights but also supports the DC ban on individual gun rights of their citizens?
This guy is A WALKING CONTRADICTION!!!!!!!!!
The California Gun law was passed over the strong objection of common sense. So i wonder if he has any.
Obama supports individual gun rights By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer
35 minutes ago
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080215/...a4rGxLqe.yFz4D
MILWAUKEE - Barack Obama said Friday that the country must do "whatever it takes" to eradicate gun violence following a campus shooting in his home state, but he believes in an individual's right to bear arms.
Obama said he spoke to Northern Illinois University's president Friday morning by phone and offered whatever help his Senate office could provide in the investigation and improving campus security. The Democratic presidential candidate spoke about the Illinois shooting to reporters while campaigning in neighboring Wisconsin.
The senator, a former constitutional law instructor, said some scholars argue the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees gun ownerships only to militias, but he believes it grants individual gun rights.
"I think there is an individual right to bear arms, but it's subject to commonsense regulation" like background checks, he said during a news conference.
He said he would support federal legislation based on a California law that would facilitate immediate tracing of bullets used in a crime. He said even though the California law was passed over the strong objection of the National Rifle Association, he thinks it's the type of law that gun owners and crime victims can get behind.
Five people, including the shooter, were killed during Thursday's ambush inside a lecture hall. Authorities said the two guns used were purchased legally less then a week ago.
"Today we offer them our thoughts and prayers, but we also have to offer them our determination to do whatever it takes to eradicate this violence from our streets, from our schools, from our neighborhoods and our cities," Obama said. "That is our duty as Americans."
Although Obama supports gun control, while campaigning in gun-friendly Idaho earlier this month, he said he does not intend to take away people's guns.
At his news conference, he voiced support for the District of Columbia's ban on handguns, which is scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court next month.
"The notion that somehow local jurisdictions can't initiate gun safety laws to deal with gang bangers and random shootings on the street isn't born out by our Constitution," Obama said.
Obama also:
• Said Clinton now is attacking him for watering down a bill to regulate the nuclear industry that she also voted for and touted on her Web site. He suggested her attack was made out of desperation because his campaign is ahead.
"I understand that Senator Clinton, periodically when she's feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal," he said. "But I think this kind of gamesmanship is not what the American people are looking for."
• Seemed to hedge on his statement last year that he would accept public funds if his Republican opponent did as well. Likely GOP nominee John McCain has said he would adhere to such an agreement, but Obama was not willing to make such a firm commitment.
"If I am the nominee, then I will make sure that our people talk to John McCain's people to find out if we're willing to abide by the same rules and regulations with respect to the general election going forward," Obama said. "But it would be presumptuous of me to say now that I'm locking myself into something when I don't even know if the other side is going to agree to it and I'm not the nominee yet."
• Blamed problems with the economy on a "failure of leadership in Washington" that includes decisions by the Bush administration on taxes and the Clinton administration on trade. He criticized "politicians (who) tout NAFTA as a success when they're in the White House and then call it a mistake when they're on the campaign trail."
• Said he has not considered whether he would give up his Senate seat if he wins the presidential nomination.
[ February 16, 2008, 01:08 AM: Message edited by: 532Fastback ]
--------------------
./_ _ _ ___ __\
(]]]_ _ o _ _[[[)
|\_o_ __ __o_/|
|__|..........|__|
68 Fastback
84 CJ7
94 HMMWV
95 GT
03 F350
17 Fusion Hybrid
Posts: 17578 | From: 530 | Registered: Jun 2002
| :
|
|
cdog301
¯
Member # 5136
|
posted
wow the ignorance here is astounding! ![[BS flag]](graemlins/bs_flag.gif)
--------------------
1992 Notch
Dss Pro Bullet
Afr 165's
GT40 U/L
Bassani X w/cats
and other goodies!!!!!!!
I love MOSTLY MUSTANGS OAKLAND CA
Posts: 386 | From: Richmond CA | Registered: Dec 2004
| :
|
|
TrueBlue
¯
Member # 1063
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by SEMPERFI510:
I voted for Bush and would do it again... I am also an Iraq war veteran.
I almost stopped reading this on the first sentence then I saw veteran.
I definately don't understand why in the hell anyone would vote for Bush again but as far as you being a veteran... ![[patriot]](graemlins/patriot.gif)
[ April 13, 2008, 10:30 AM: Message edited by: TrueBlue ]
--------------------
KB '01 GT
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v492/davis769/GIFS/samj.gif[/IMG]
Posts: 1527 | From: Around the way | Registered: Mar 2002
| :
|
|
MustangNate
¯
Member # 4559
|
posted
What do Hilary & Obama have for experience that'd make me want to vote for them?
- Hilary is a senator mainly because she is a Clinton.
- Obama is from Illinois.....Ugh....Yeah..
Also, stated somewhere earlier in this thread was something like "since when did religion make a difference in a values, character, or integrity?"
I have a little video for you.
http://www.themoviefitna.com
Watch that and get back to me.
[ April 13, 2008, 04:37 PM: Message edited by: MustangNate ]
--------------------
1989 Mustang LX Vert, 5.0 Auto
Posts: 1032 | From: Chico | Registered: May 2004
| :
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wildfire532FB
CAFords OG
Member # 1482
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by rgtrahn:
quote:
Originally posted by 532Fastback:
quote:
Originally posted by rgtrahn:
Originally posted by: 532Fastback
Denmark has free health care, actually its not really free they get taxed like 60% of their income to pay for it but anyone can go to the hospital and doesn't have to pay anything wither your paying your share or not.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif) I don't know where you got that figure from. I just did a little quick search and although not the most credible source wikipedia states that tax burden in Denmark in 2008 will amount to 47.7% second only to Sweden. However the average wage in Denmark for a manufacturing plant worker is US$39.15(inflation?) The united States is the only industrialized country that does not make health care accessible to all citizens. It is easy to sit there and say, "Oh it will cost us this and that", but wait until you fall flat on your face and not by your own doing/causing it could be a car accident, illness, or any number of things. Shit happens to good people, honest people, and hard working Americans. We need something in place to help them out. I am sure you would be singing a different song and dance if something unfortunate happened to you or your family; especially if you had children that couldn't see a doctor, or had to make a choice between milk and prescription medicine. Look around us the Britt's have universalized, as have the Canadians, and did you know that one of the top places in the world to get medical care is in Cuba? The best medicine is preemptive treatment. It cost a lot more for someone to run to the E.R. for the flu than it would to give that same person a flu shot. It is okay though, I understand that people are probably naive and ignorant about how many people suffer in this country. Just because you were blessed with parents who raised you with silver spoon does not mean everyone else has. Furthermore, Americans on average die sooner than our same counterparts in Canada. Did you also know that the United States ranks among last in "Health" meaning doctors, nurses, and treatments? It is time for change. I am not saying it is going to be perfect, there will be bumps in the road, but it will vastly improve the quality of life that we have as Americans. I respect ![[worship]](graemlins/worship.gif) John McCain he is a living legend the man has accomplished and done things unfathomable However, McCain is more Bush Policy. We have spent 8 horrendous years under that idiot. It is time to improve our standing and position in the world and I for one do not want another four years of the same. Obviously I am not the only one, the people are speaking and it was obvious two years ago when Congress shifted power and it is obvious now. People want change it is that simple.
Personal experience, family friends in Denmark. I can change the figure in Wikipedia if you only believe what you read on that site. [/QB][/QUOTE]
I stand corrected, according to Guinness
Book of world Records they are the heaviest taxed; between 42-68% depending on what your income is. However, I did mention that Wikipedia was not the most credible source and it was a quick search not a college report. Denmark has other problems as well, like inflation. I think you are mis-representing that fact as well,they are not being taxed that high because of health care. [/QB][/QUOTE]
I know that in Denmark you don't pay ANYTHING when you go to the doctor weather its open heart surgery, or the flu.
[ April 15, 2008, 12:47 AM: Message edited by: 532Fastback ]
--------------------
./_ _ _ ___ __\
(]]]_ _ o _ _[[[)
|\_o_ __ __o_/|
|__|..........|__|
68 Fastback
84 CJ7
94 HMMWV
95 GT
03 F350
17 Fusion Hybrid
Posts: 17578 | From: 530 | Registered: Jun 2002
| :
|
|
solbrothers
¯
Member # 7524
|
posted
bros before hoes
--------------------
2100+ posts, 15 useful
Posts: 2172 | From: vallejo | Registered: Mar 2007
| :
|
|
Yaterstang
¯
Member # 7659
|
posted
Found this on best of craigslist!
"No taxation without representation"
What do I get for my federal taxes? Our public schools are failing, Social Security is insolvent, Medicare & Medicaid are run by a corrupt government that uses taxpayer money to overpay the corporations that run it. Our military is in shambles, our economy is on the brink of complete collapse and all our leaders can think of to do in order to solve the problem is to use our tax dollars to bail out the mistakes of corporations while Americans end up homeless and broke. And stuck with the bill.
Do people understand how much money we have spent in Iraq? Seriously really, get a grip and really GET how much money has gone down the hole? And even if they do, do they realize that the Iraq bill, from a dollar perspective, HASN'T COME DUE YET??? The shit going on with the economy right now has NOTHING to do with the THREE FUCKING TRILLION DOLLARS that this clusterfuck in Iraq will eventually cost us.
$3,000,000,000,000 / 300,000,000 = $10,000/ea.
That means that RIGHT NOW, without ANY interest, each and every American in this country is in for $10 fucking K. On top of our current federal and state income tax burden.
Now, I pay for electricity. I pay for internet. I pay for television and I pay for my phone. The tax I pay at the pump covers most of the cash either state or federal government spend on shit like road repairs, but whatever. I pay for the gas to heat my home and cook my food. I pay a shitload at the hospital and even pay tax on some of that shit. I pay sales tax. I even pay retail tax, even though the corporations pass ALL their taxes on to me when I buy their shit. So what the fuck do I get?
A military that is now broken. An infrastructure that is crumbling. A justice system that favors their own, the rich and the politicians, and if to add insult to injury, herd me like a fucking piece of cattle and actually go out of their way to find a reason to make me pay them for some bullshit slight.
So what the hell is a rational guy supposed to do? What did our forefathers do, when faced with this kind of bogus farce of representation, when bullied into paying for something they don't even want or need?
When a man with a checkbook has greater sway than a million voices, OR EVEN ONE FUCKING VOICE, then hasn't our grievance become that of the founders of this country?
Posts: 2968 | From: Natomas | Registered: May 2007
| :
|
|
DLo
¯
Member # 6133
|
posted
^^^^^^^^^
--------------------
94 GT
Posts: 1876 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Oct 2005
| :
|
|
TheBrain
I'm the Real
John Force
Member # 35
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by Blind:
good speaker my ass, he talks like he's explaining long division to a group of 1st graders.
Now that's funny ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
1989 LX vert 342
11.662 @ 116.65 1.57 60ft. N/A
10.227 @ 134.59 1.41 60ft 200 shot 3600lbs
2003 Ranger 4 door
15.99 @ 87
Posts: 1264 | From: Back in Redding CA | Registered: Jul 2000
| :
|
|
|
Email this post to someone!
Printer friendly view of this Ford topic
