Page 3 of 4 1234
Results 21 to 30 of 33
  1. SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    11-02-2011, 01:53 PM #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    I didnt provide a link in the first post. Much like you havent provided links from time to time. Nothing sinister intended. i provided it in my later post to demonstrate that you were wrong that
    I was hiding something. I WAS NOT. So please stop trying to make a mountain out of a proceduralpoint and address the fact that you lied about what I "left" out/
    And definitely no "spin". I bet you cant apologize and or admit that you posted that I left out a part of the link which referred to "Democratic Senators and their wealth". I did not and your a liar. Plain and simple. FOR the fifth time show me where i didl.
    Obviously you cant.

    Again, I didnt as you said LEAVE OUT anything referring to "DEMOCRATIC SENATORS and their wealth" YOU LIED when you said
    I did. I provided the entire article and you were wrong. Yes you should apologize but the SiriuslyAngry in you wont
    allow you to admit you were wrong. Just like you werent able to admit that you were wrong about Peter Schiff and wrong about Climate change.


    Your angry judgements about how you define me are clearly inaccurate as i have many times taken positions which disagree with people on the wings of my party.

    Your statistics are right wing talking points meant to mislead people. You miss the point entirely as you often do.
    We have been over and over how the right wing talking point on the 47% who dont pay any federal income tax is
    misleading. i can provide it again if you so wish.
    Of course the wealthy pay a higher % taxes. Do you think they shouldnt? But it has nothing to do with the fact that
    in the past ten years they have benefitted inordinately. There is a reason that income dispartiy is increasing. Do you
    really believe that isnt a problem for this country?

    The fact is that the majority of millionaires KNOW that they have gotten a very good deal these past years and that is why they
    are in favor of Buffets proposals.
    Please simply acknowledge that you didn't provide a link, nor did you post the entire article (thereby omitting the rest of the article which cited RICH DEMOCRATIC SENATORS). Maybe John was right about the lack of common sense and logic. You yourself noted that you are challanged by completing your income taxes yourself (I do ours and find it quite simple).

    Have you ever thought that income disparity is increasing due to inflationism? Nope, that's not the party line even though Keynes himself said it does.

    Yes, the rich do pay a higher % NOW yet your party wants... MORE.

    It's been a while since we've had such fun dialog.

  2. Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    11-02-2011, 02:09 PM #22
    I already wrote and acknowledged that i didnt provide the link in my first post. There was nothing sinister in it as the rest of the article had NOTHING to do with the topic. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WISH TO TURN THIS INTO A PROCEDURAL DEBATE AS opposed TO ONE ON THE TOPIC. TSK. TSK.

    IM STARTING TO THINK YOU ARE JOHN.

    NOW please admit that the article i posted which started the thread HAD NO REFERENCE TO "RICH DEMOCRATIC SENATORS".

    HERE IS THE ENTIRE ARTICLE I STARTED THE THREAD WITH:

    “Members of Congress had a collective net worth of more than $2 billion in 2010, a nearly 25 percent increase over the 2008 total, according to a Roll Call analysis of Members' financial disclosure forms,” Roll Call writes. “Nearly 90 percent of that increase is concentrated in the 50 richest Members of Congress.” Among the richest, Reps. Mike McCaul (worth at least $294 million) and Darrell Issa (at least $295 million).
    “Republicans may be trying to focus their messaging on jobs and the economy — and hammering President Barack Obama for campaigning — but they still have time for some red meat base-baiting on the House floor,” Roll Call reports. “To wit: House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (Va.) decision to bring to the floor a measure that ‘reaffirms ‘In God We Trust’ as the official motto of the United States and supports and encourages the public display of the national motto in all public buildings, public schools, and other government institutions,’ according to the resolution, sponsored by Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.).”
    “A Newsweek investigation found about five dozen of the most fiscally conservative Republicans ‘trying to gobble up the very largesse they publicly disown, in the time-honored, budget-busting tradition of bringing home the bacon for local constituents,’” PoliticalWire notes.
    Browse: congress


    So as you can see I didnt leave out, hide or obfuscate ANY reference to "rich Democratic senatorsPlease admit you lied.

    No i dont think income disparity has to with inflationism. I think it has to do with tax policy and the power of
    lobbyists in Congress.

    you cant keep having it both ways. You cant say its a minor change to raise the tax rate on the wealthy back to what
    it was under Clinton and say that you dont really have a problem with it. And then say "your party wants more".
    Somewhat contradictory dont you think. Your logic is sometimes very faulty much like it was with Peter Shciff and Climate
    change.

    I want to restore some basic fairness in the political system and in tax policy. You keep arguing Republican right wing talking points.

  3. SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    11-02-2011, 02:27 PM #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    I already wrote and acknowledged that i didnt provide the link in my first post. There was nothing sinister in it as the rest of the article had NOTHING to do with the topic. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WISH TO TURN THIS INTO A PROCEDURAL DEBATE AS opposed TO ONE ON THE TOPIC. TSK. TSK.

    IM STARTING TO THINK YOU ARE JOHN.

    NOW please admit that the article i posted which started the thread HAD NO REFERENCE TO "RICH DEMOCRATIC SENATORS".

    HERE IS THE ENTIRE ARTICLE I STARTED THE THREAD WITH:

    “Members of Congress had a collective net worth of more than $2 billion in 2010, a nearly 25 percent increase over the 2008 total, according to a Roll Call analysis of Members' financial disclosure forms,” Roll Call writes. “Nearly 90 percent of that increase is concentrated in the 50 richest Members of Congress.” Among the richest, Reps. Mike McCaul (worth at least $294 million) and Darrell Issa (at least $295 million).
    “Republicans may be trying to focus their messaging on jobs and the economy — and hammering President Barack Obama for campaigning — but they still have time for some red meat base-baiting on the House floor,” Roll Call reports. “To wit: House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (Va.) decision to bring to the floor a measure that ‘reaffirms ‘In God We Trust’ as the official motto of the United States and supports and encourages the public display of the national motto in all public buildings, public schools, and other government institutions,’ according to the resolution, sponsored by Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.).”
    “A Newsweek investigation found about five dozen of the most fiscally conservative Republicans ‘trying to gobble up the very largesse they publicly disown, in the time-honored, budget-busting tradition of bringing home the bacon for local constituents,’” PoliticalWire notes.
    Browse: congress


    So as you can see I didnt leave out, hide or obfuscate ANY reference to "rich Democratic senatorsPlease admit you lied.

    No i dont think income disparity has to with inflationism. I think it has to do with tax policy and the power of
    lobbyists in Congress.

    you cant keep having it both ways. You cant say its a minor change to raise the tax rate on the wealthy back to what
    it was under Clinton and say that you dont really have a problem with it. And then say "your party wants more".
    Somewhat contradictory dont you think. Your logic is sometimes very faulty much like it was with Peter Shciff and Climate
    change.

    I want to restore some basic fairness in the political system and in tax policy. You keep arguing Republican right wing talking points.
    Here's my bottom line on taxes Lloyd. This family pays enough. It robs us of wealth we can pass on to our children. Now keep in mind, our taxes will not go down especially in light of the situation brought to us by our politicians.

    As for the rich, there already is "basic fairness". It should be obvious, but to recognize it goes against the party line. What is unfair is a collective mob holding signs saying "tax the rich".

    Only in your world must a conservative viewpoint be a republican one. It's an easy mistake, but a mistake none the less. I am simply presenting facts that redistribution is alive and well already. The left doesn't want to recognize this FACT.

  4. Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    11-02-2011, 02:37 PM #24
    No apology for stating i left out something on "rich democratic senators"? Shame, shame.
    Admitting mistakes isnt one of your strengths huh? Unbelieveable.

    Middle class families do pay enough absolutely. The wealthy do not. Sorry you cant agree that a simple return toClinton tax rates on the upper income tax bracket is fair. I think you are beingvdefensive because it disagrees with some right wing ideological purity test that you unknowingly have bought into. Grover Norquist?

    Right now at this moment in history, the Republican party is largely a party of the Conservative movement. In fact many retired Republicans are indicating their dismay at the extreme direction the Republican Party is heading. Whether its for ideological reasons or for purely political reasons (as Mitch MCconell said "my first job is to defeat President Obama")
    they are fostering policies which are hurting the middle class.

    I dont think the evidence agrees with your position that "basic fairness" exists. Its the exact opposite in my opinion.

    " a collective mob". I think nothing more needs to be said. Your characterization says it all.
    You borrowed that line from Eric Cantor (Republican leader)and the right wing media. Whats interesting is that he
    has pulled back from it when he saw public opinion swing the other way and you have not.
    Last edited by Havakasha; 11-02-2011 at 02:42 PM.

  5. SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    11-02-2011, 02:53 PM #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    No apology for stating i left out something on "rich democratic senators"? Shame, shame.
    Admitting mistakes isnt one of your strengths huh? Unbelieveable.

    Middle class families do pay enough absolutely. The wealthy do not. Sorry you cant agree that a simple return toClinton tax rates on the upper income tax bracket is fair. I think you are beingvdefensive because it disagrees with some right wing ideological purity test that you unknowingly have bought into. Grover Norquist?

    Right now at this moment in history, the Republican party is largely a party of the Conservative movement. In fact many retired Republicans are indicating their dismay at the extreme direction the Republican Party is heading. Whether its for ideological reasons or for purely political reasons (as Mitch MCconell said "my first job is to defeat President Obama")
    they are fostering policies which are hurting the middle class.

    I dont think the evidence agrees with your position that "basic fairness" exists. Its the exact opposite in my opinion.

    " a collective mob". I think nothing more needs to be said. Your characterization says it all.
    You borrowed that line from Eric Cantor (Republican leader)and the right wing media. Whats interesting is that he
    has pulled back from it when he saw public opinion swing the other way and you have not.
    So you want an apology for you selectively cutting out part of an article and using that specific porton of the article to disparage republicans. What planet are you on? Then you have the balls to say you didn't do it.

    Right wing purity test? That's funny. The top 1% payed nearly 37% of all income tax collected (confiscated lol) by the US Federal Government. That's a pretty big number, and there is nothing right wing about it.

    http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

    The National Taxpayer Union is a non partisan, non profit citizens group. Here, check it out: http://www.ntu.org/about-ntu/

    Thank you for your breif summary on the republican party.

    Would you like to see a picture of the collective mob? There are many to choose from: http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1T4...w=1204&bih=602

  6. Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    11-02-2011, 02:57 PM #26
    Hey wack job. lol You lied when you said i left out a part of the article that said "rich democratic senators". I demonstrated it
    and the fact you wont admit it is beyond shocking. If you cant acknowledge that SIMPLE FACT then i understand that no matter
    when you are wrong about something you wont admit it.

    The rest of the article said NOTHING about Democrats, Republicans or about Congress getting wealthy. Are you loony. Or are you actually JOHN?

    Goodnight. Lol.

    SiriuslyLooney, SiriuslyWacked, SiriuslyUnableToAdmitAnyWrong.
    Last edited by Havakasha; 11-02-2011 at 03:04 PM.

  7. SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    11-02-2011, 03:10 PM #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    Hey wack job. lol You lied when you said i left out a part of the article that said "rich democratic senators". I demonstrated it
    and the fact you wont admit it is beyond shocking. If you cant acknowledge that SIMPLE FACT then i understand that no matter
    when you are wrong about something you wont admit it.

    The rest of the article said NOTHING about Democrats, Republicans or about Congress getting wealthy. Are you loony. Or are you actually JOHN?

    Goodnight. Lol.

    SiriuslyLooney, SiriuslyWacked, SiriuslyUnableToAdmitAnyWrong.
    I don't know what you have demonstrated. I just re-read post #1, and it is indeed a PART of an article (edit: "report" is more appropriate) that was selectively cut and used to deride your political opposition. Shame on you for not reading the entire article (report) and finding out what was ALSO in it about your own party.

    Read the link I posted. I think that's what is confusing you.
    Last edited by SiriuslyLong; 11-02-2011 at 03:16 PM.

  8. Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    11-02-2011, 04:07 PM #28
    Too clever by half. I understand you dont want to own up to a false statement that i failed to include words about "rich Democratic Senators" FROM MY LINK. This is almost as silly as not admitting that Peter Schiff was wrong on a whole host of his predictions. I detect a VERY troubling pattern from you SiriuslyWrong.

    I have now asked you a number of times to show us all the quote about "rich Democratic Senators" that you said i LEFT OUT OF MY LINK. STILL WAITING for you to show the evidence. If you cant then clearly the LIAR label fits.


    YOU POSTED A DIFFERENT LINK. MY LINK FOR MY ARTICLE WAS FROM MSNBC.
    NOT USA TODAY. You posted an entirely different article with different quotes IMPLYING i had left them out.
    Last edited by Havakasha; 11-02-2011 at 04:22 PM.

  9. Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    11-02-2011, 04:12 PM #29
    HERE IS THE LINK:http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news...ich-get-richer

    And here below once again in its entirety. As you can clearly see i didnt leave out anything in MY LINK related to "rich Democratic Senators". I didnt imply that only Republicans in Congress are wealthy. You took it the entirely wrong way. I only stated that I now understand why Republcans are opposing tax cuts for the rich. The wealthy corporations are largely funding the Republican opposition to the Democratic proposal.


    Congress: The rich get richer
    “Members of Congress had a collective net worth of more than $2 billion in 2010, a nearly 25 percent increase over the 2008 total, according to a Roll Call analysis of Members' financial disclosure forms,” Roll Call writes. “Nearly 90 percent of that increase is concentrated in the 50 richest Members of Congress.” Among the richest, Reps. Mike McCaul (worth at least $294 million) and Darrell Issa (at least $295 million).
    “Republicans may be trying to focus their messaging on jobs and the economy — and hammering President Barack Obama for campaigning — but they still have time for some red meat base-baiting on the House floor,” Roll Call reports. “To wit: House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (Va.) decision to bring to the floor a measure that ‘reaffirms ‘In God We Trust’ as the official motto of the United States and supports and encourages the public display of the national motto in all public buildings, public schools, and other government institutions,’ according to the resolution, sponsored by Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.).”
    “A Newsweek investigation found about five dozen of the most fiscally conservative Republicans ‘trying to gobble up the very largesse they publicly disown, in the time-honored, budget-busting tradition of bringing home the bacon for local constituents,’” PoliticalWire notes.
    Last edited by Havakasha; 11-02-2011 at 04:22 PM.

  10. SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    11-02-2011, 04:19 PM #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    Too clever by half. I understand you dont want to own up to a false statement that i failed to include words about "rich Democratic Senators" This almost as silly as not admitting that Peter Schiff was wrong on a whole host of his predictions. I detect a VERY troubling pattern from you SiriuslyWrong.

    I have now asked you a number of times to show us all the quote about "rich Democratic Senators" that you said i left out of my link. STILL WAITING for you to show the evidence. If you cant then clearly the LIAR label fits.


    YOU POSTED THE WRONG LINK. SHAME ON YOU. MY LINK FOR MY ARTICLE WAS FROM MSNBCj.
    NOT USA TODAY as you said. You posted an entirely different article with different quotes implying i had left them out.
    I posted one of many links that covered the report. Yes, I find this out just recently; hence the edit above. You didn't read the link until now? Face it. You were not thorough. You didn't realize the report called out your own party when you posted disparaging remarks on your rival party. That's on you, not me.

Page 3 of 4 1234