GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum
Page 4 of 4 < 123 4
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Ok, I think I've had it with Bush (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=635443)

edgeprod 07-20-2006 09:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pocketkangaroo
Bush spends like a liberal
You're absolutely right. This Presidency has been marred by some of the worst financial irresponsibility we've seen in a long time. Bush should have used his veto power to strike down Liberal spending a LONG time ago. Even if it would have gotten overturned, he would have shown that he isn't going to pass the burden on without a fight.

edgeprod 07-20-2006 09:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayeff
That is the sales pitch. What experience has shown repeatedly since WW2 is that as a stimulant for growth, tax cuts run a very poor second to increasing demand.
That's not the reason.

When tax cuts occur, you have to try harder to balance a budget (although, admittedly, that hasn't been happening either lately). Because of this, some of the Liberal social programs and the Conservative pork gets tossed out. This causes people to have to seek employment rather than being on welfare, and creates a (false) perception of prosperity in the populace. So, people spend several times their tax break instead of resolving debt, which creates another cycle of bankruptcy filings. This, of course, is harder now, creating more poor people -- which creates more sex, which creates more kids, who work for $4/day in China.

Thus, tax cuts help young children learn responsibility. That's my point.

You buy that .. right?

:1orglaugh

edgeprod 07-20-2006 09:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pocketkangaroo
I agree. However that is an issue both sides have a problem with.
It's a worse issue for the Republicans, at least on the surface. With the exception of scumbags like Kerry and Kennedy, the Democrats are overspending to create social programs, and try to help people. The Republicans are overspending to make the rich richer and to help oil companies.

They both need to stop.

minusonebit 07-20-2006 09:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by czarina
just one more proof that he is a total ass hat.
You can go fuck yourself if that comment was directed to me. If it was about Bush, then cheers. :thumbsup

Quote:
Originally Posted by 12clicks
how sadly uneducated you are.
lets just pic one.
how are tax cuts bad?
Tax cuts are normally good.

The way Bush did tax cuts was disgusting. I was refering to Bush's taxcuts. He cut it for the rich and for familes only. Which is a typical Republican move. Single people making an average income got absoultely nothing from his tax cuts.

E$_manager 07-20-2006 09:26 PM
more people in our camp, who thinks he is the wrong man :)

sacX 07-20-2006 09:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12clicks
how sadly uneducated you are.
lets just pic one.
how are tax cuts bad?
tax cuts in themselves aren't bad, but ideally they should be tied to reductions in spending also. Mr Bush is not a fiscal conservative by any stretch of the imagination.

Aquaman 07-20-2006 09:44 PM
The same question was just brought up in the EU. Now when Bush used his Veto, most of the Catholic countries in the EU are going to block EU's budget for embriotic stamcell research.

My dad suffers from Parkinson disease and I'm very pissed right now about this news. If there is a god, please dear god, let huge meteors hit the following countries and let noone survive:

Germany
Austria
Lithuania
Luxemburg
Malta
Poland
Slovenia
Slovakia

Thanks in advance dear loving god. Let them all die.

edgeprod 07-20-2006 09:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cristie
more people in our camp, who thinks he is the wrong man
Sure, but it's easy to go to "camp" and just sit around and bitch.

The camp I'd like to see people go to is the "here's a better alternative" camp. I haven't seen a decent candidate since Clinton. And, no matter how you feel about him as a person, he wasted his intelligence and opportunities.

tony286 07-20-2006 09:48 PM
Clicks is a true conservative my Dad said the same thing and he is hardcore he voted for Goldwater lol

edgeprod 07-20-2006 09:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquaman
If there is a god, please dear god, let huge meteors hit the following countries and let noone survive. Thanks in advance dear loving god. Let them all die.
This seems to be a highly compassionate and well thought out argument.

KRL 07-20-2006 09:54 PM
The whole concept of one man having so much power in today's world is flawed to begin with, smart or dumb.

There should just be a board of directors in the executive office. And this group shouldn't be professional politicians like you see in the congress.

edgeprod 07-20-2006 09:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KRL
The whole concept of one man having so much power in today's world is flawed to begin with, smart or dumb.
What power does he really have?

Kimo 07-20-2006 10:09 PM
uh, veto power? duhhh

Aquaman 07-20-2006 10:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by edgeprod
This seems to be a highly compassionate and well thought out argument.
It's in the danish news this morning ( http://politiken.dk/VisArtikel.iasp?PageID=466439 if you know danish )

Those countries I mentioned ARE going to block the budget for embriotic stamcell research.

Those countries shouldn't exist.

E$_manager 07-20-2006 10:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by edgeprod
Sure, but it's easy to go to "camp" and just sit around and bitch.

The camp I'd like to see people go to is the "here's a better alternative" camp. I haven't seen a decent candidate since Clinton. And, no matter how you feel about him as a person, he wasted his intelligence and opportunities.
By the way, i agree with you. I felt good about Clinton, mostly i felt good about his romance.:winkwink:

edgeprod 07-21-2006 11:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimo
uh, veto power? duhhh
Are you really saying that there should be no checks and balances built into the American system of Democracy? Even a veto can be overturned -- everything is a check and balance.

I assume from the "duhhh" at the end of your post that you aren't having a serious conversation, so I won't hold my breath on this one.

edgeprod 07-21-2006 11:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquaman
Those countries I mentioned ARE going to block the budget for embriotic stamcell research.

Those countries shouldn't exist.
This, also, seems to be a highly compassionate and well thought out argument.

edgeprod 07-21-2006 12:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cristie
By the way, i agree with you. I felt good about Clinton, mostly i felt good about his romance.
Thanks. Now go find me a candidate. :)

broke 07-21-2006 06:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by edgeprod
Unfortunately, because we live in the reality of a two-party system, your only "real" voice is in a political party's primary. For example, I am a registered Democrat, so in Connecticut, I have a choice between Ned Lamont or Joe Lieberman. A Republican isn't going to beat either one of them, so the "real" election is in the primary. Depending on your state, you can't participate in the primary without registering with a party. But, I respect your independence.
Don't be so sure...

If Joe loses to Lamont in the primary and ends up running as an independant, you may just see that seat go the Republican nominee.

minusonebit 07-21-2006 07:13 PM
Bush is a fuckin idiot.

12clicks 07-21-2006 07:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayeff
That is the sales pitch. What experience has shown repeatedly since WW2 is that as a stimulant for growth, tax cuts run a very poor second to increasing demand.

The reason is that corporate America is no longer in the business of taking risks. It only reacts. Nor do the wealthy, although they are usually the main beneficiaries of tax cuts, increase their spending in response.

Thus, painful as it may be to admit, Democrat spending on programs which put more money into the bottom of the economy, are much more productive. Almost all the people who benefit from their programs are on modest incomes, therefore they will spend the additional money. Once in circulation, it increases state and federal taxes and it also generates jobs, primarily jobs at the bottom end of the economic ladder, further fuelling the cycle.

It is not what many Republicans want to believe, but if you correlate government and the economy since 1950, Republicans have been responsible for shorter and less dramatic periods of growth, longer and deeper declines. Democrats have in fact performed much better overall.
If your story were true, then why not just tax at 100% and let the government do everything for you?:stoned

edgeprod 07-22-2006 02:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by broke
Don't be so sure...

If Joe loses to Lamont in the primary and ends up running as an independant, you may just see that seat go the Republican nominee.
It's difficult for Republicans to win in a state like Connecticut. It's not as bad as California, but residents are blind to quite a few issues.

Strangely, Iraq isn't one of them, due to the proximity to NYC.

Also, the Republicans aren't running a real candidate this year. The party wants the current guy to step down so they can run someone better. They've asked him to do this, but you don't see the back-biting and throat cutting that exists in the Lieberman situation happening in that case.

Dirty Dane 07-22-2006 02:31 AM
Bush is a nice guy when you get to know him


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:30 PM.
Page 4 of 4 < 123 4
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123