Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home Register FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 10-27-2017, 05:34 PM   #31
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
Thats been my point all along he doesn't have the Maturity to be POTUS but no one has an issue with it as long he gives them something they want ... like lowering the corporate tax rate the fact are trickle down economics dont work .. and hows he paying for this ?
Since you conveniently avoided answering the question " If you truly believe that "trickle down" doesn't work, then why on earth are you for government trickle down policy?", you should absolutely read this entire article by Thomas Sowell regarding the bogus notion of "Trickle Down theory of economics":

http://www.tsowell.com/images/Hoover%20Proof.pdf

There is no such theory. This fabricated notion of "trickle down" is used in trying to discredit the proven connection between lowering tax rates, including and especially for the wealthy, and the following increase in federal tax revenue. How successful this ruse is in convincing those who don't know the real history, nor how economy and taxation work together, is demonstrated by how you refer to the trickle down theory and confidently state that it doesn't work.

If you're interested in the truth of the matter rather than regurgitating false political talking points, please read the whole article.
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2017, 06:58 PM   #32
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnR View Post
Kelly probably said something like "These guys know what they can happen and they in a way signed up for this and sadly know this could happen, so here is what I recommend you say to his widow..." followed by something proper and understanding.

And then DJT had flashes of the conversation pop up faster than his filter (hahaha) could process them and the words leapt out of his mouth.
Why would that even be necessary? And for Kelly to clarify? I thought Trump had called every Gold Star Parent...and now he needs coaching?

The man has been a CEO for how many decades and he needs help to console a military widow? Jesus, this doesn't require help...

It just requires a little empathy.
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2017, 07:13 PM   #33
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Why would that even be necessary? And for Kelly to clarify? I thought Trump had called every Gold Star Parent...and now he needs coaching?

The man has been a CEO for how many decades and he needs help to console a military widow? Jesus, this doesn't require help...

It just requires a little empathy.
It may not be necessary, it may not be required, but it seems that Trump has always sought the advice of "experts" to accomplish what he wants to do. Is that a bad thing? You make it sound God-awful.
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2017, 07:38 PM   #34
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
It may not be necessary, it may not be required, but it seems that Trump has always sought the advice of "experts" to accomplish what he wants to do. Is that a bad thing? You make it sound God-awful.
Another log on the fire.
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2017, 09:21 PM   #35
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Another log on the fire.
Why do you guys keep throwing logs in this frenzied fire meant to burn his house down. Not much empathy there. Mean spirited.
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 04:11 AM   #36
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 1,519
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
Since you conveniently avoided answering the question " If you truly believe that "trickle down" doesn't work, then why on earth are you for government trickle down policy?", you should absolutely read this entire article by Thomas Sowell regarding the bogus notion of "Trickle Down theory of economics":

http://www.tsowell.com/images/Hoover%20Proof.pdf

There is no such theory. This fabricated notion of "trickle down" is used in trying to discredit the proven connection between lowering tax rates, including and especially for the wealthy, and the following increase in federal tax revenue. How successful this ruse is in convincing those who don't know the real history, nor how economy and taxation work together, is demonstrated by how you refer to the trickle down theory and confidently state that it doesn't work.

If you're interested in the truth of the matter rather than regurgitating false political talking points, please read the whole article.
https://www.thebalance.com/trickle-d...t-work-3305572

Trickle-down economics says that Reagan's lower tax rates should have helped people in all income levels. In fact, the opposite occurred. Income inequality worsened. Between 1979 and 2005, after-tax household income rose 6 percent for the bottom fifth. That sounds great until you see what happened for the top fifth. Their income increased by 80 percent. The top 1 percent saw their income triple. Instead of trickling down, it appears that prosperity trickled up.

is that a talking point ? no those are the facts... funny how your the only one here that posts the Truth .
wdmso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 04:26 AM   #37
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Why would that even be necessary? And for Kelly to clarify? I thought Trump had called every Gold Star Parent...and now he needs coaching?

The man has been a CEO for how many decades and he needs help to console a military widow? Jesus, this doesn't require help...

It just requires a little empathy.
Hillary would feign shriek "WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE??"
scottw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 04:50 AM   #38
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post

Income inequality worsened.

after-tax household income rose 6 percent for the bottom fifth. That sounds great so you're saying everyone's income went up
doesn't income have more to do with the motivation and drive of the individual than government policy? and that would be directly affected by opportunity available and a vibrant economy with as much money flowing through it as possible?....the idea with "trickle down" was/is that there was more money moving through the free market economy as opposed to more money controlled and doled out through government agencies and coffers...I don't think there was ever any promise of "Income Equality"....whether the individual takes advantage of that or not is up to them....I guess if you are locked into a job where your pay scale and advancement opportunity is pre-determined it would not matter either way except to complain that others are getting "richer"

Last edited by scottw; 10-28-2017 at 05:03 AM..
scottw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 06:40 AM   #39
JohnR
Certifiable Intertidal Anguiologist
iTrader: (1)
 
JohnR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Somewhere between OOB & west of Watch Hill
Posts: 31,691
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Why would that even be necessary? And for Kelly to clarify? I thought Trump had called every Gold Star Parent...and now he needs coaching?

The man has been a CEO for how many decades and he needs help to console a military widow? Jesus, this doesn't require help...

It just requires a little empathy.

Ohh he lies, he is just not anywhere as competent at clearing up the lying as his predecessor and he doesn't have the benefit of the media that generally covered Obama favorably.

Had Obama been a real centrist or a moderate rather than a progressive he could have been great - he was just great to his fans.

~Fix the Bait~ ~Pogies Forever~

Striped Bass Fishing - All Stripers


Kobayashi Maru Election - there is no way to win.


Apocalypse is Coming:
JohnR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 07:22 AM   #40
Nebe
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Nebe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: newpawht
Posts: 19,484
When you are a narcissistic sociopath, empathy is non existent.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Nebe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 07:49 AM   #41
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnR View Post
Ohh he lies, he is just not anywhere as competent at clearing up the lying as his predecessor and he doesn't have the benefit of the media that generally covered Obama favorably.

Had Obama been a real centrist or a moderate rather than a progressive he could have been great - he was just great to his fans.
What did Obama ever lie about?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 08:13 AM   #42
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
Hillary would feign shriek "WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE??"
Sexist.
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 08:13 AM   #43
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
doesn't income have more to do with the motivation and drive of the individual than government policy? and that would be directly affected by opportunity available and a vibrant economy with as much money flowing through it as possible?....the idea with "trickle down" was/is that there was more money moving through the free market economy as opposed to more money controlled and doled out through government agencies and coffers...I don't think there was ever any promise of "Income Equality"....whether the individual takes advantage of that or not is up to them....I guess if you are locked into a job where your pay scale and advancement opportunity is pre-determined it would not matter either way except to complain that others are getting "richer"
What a crock.
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 11:10 AM   #44
JohnR
Certifiable Intertidal Anguiologist
iTrader: (1)
 
JohnR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Somewhere between OOB & west of Watch Hill
Posts: 31,691
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
What did Obama ever lie about?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
  • If you like your health-care plan, you can keep it
  • If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor.
  • Benghazi was result of a video (it was a planned attack by local forces )
  • Calling ISIS the JV team and then saying he didn't
  • I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits, now or in the future.
  • Im proud of the fact that with two weeks to go, were probably the first administration in modern history that hasnt had a major scandal in the White House.
  • That the Obama Administration will be the most Transparent, ever.
  • He certainly lied on Hillary's email server - he knew.
  • And of course this winner: Hillary is most qualified presidential candidate in history

~Fix the Bait~ ~Pogies Forever~

Striped Bass Fishing - All Stripers


Kobayashi Maru Election - there is no way to win.


Apocalypse is Coming:
JohnR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 11:30 AM   #45
Slipknot
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
Slipknot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middleboro MA
Posts: 16,084
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
What did Obama ever lie about?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Easier to list what he did NOT lie about!


He certainly did not try to tell the truth about the IRS targeting conservatives. If you need links to timeline of his lies and cover ups, just search, it's all there on the internet.

from 2015

On The Daily Show, President Obama blamed Republicans for the IRS scandal:

“You’ve got this back office, and they’re going after the Tea Party. Well, it turned out, no, Congress had passed a crummy law that didn’t give people guidance in terms of what it was they were trying to do. They did it poorly and stupidly. The truth of the matter is that there was not some big conspiracy there. They were trying to sort out these conflicting demands. You don’t want all this money pouring through non-for- profits, but you also want to make sure everybody is being treated fairly.”

Really, Mr. President? For effect, perhaps he should reprise his testy “not even a smidgen of corruption” remark to Fox News. The President keeps claiming there is no evidence the IRS was used for political targeting. You be the judge:



And now the IRS is apologizing when they should be prosecuted not apologizing.


Do you want to get into the Russian collusion beginning with uranium?

you asked


Let's ALL make America great again

"A government that does not trust it's law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is itself unworthy of trust" James Madison

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." Ronald Regan
Slipknot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 01:00 PM   #46
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Why would that even be necessary? And for Kelly to clarify? I thought Trump had called every Gold Star Parent...and now he needs coaching?

The man has been a CEO for how many decades and he needs help to console a military widow? Jesus, this doesn't require help...

It just requires a little empathy.
The approach that served Trump well in business (be bold, and if necessary, a jerk) doesn't always carry over well into every human endeavor.

"It just requires a little empathy"

For Gods sake man, Trump has a 4-star general who is a gold star father, as his right hand man. How on earth is it a character flaw, for Trump to seek his guidance, to make sure he is using the best words possible, when speaking to people who are grieving?
Jim in CT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 01:03 PM   #47
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebe View Post
When you are a narcissistic sociopath, empathy is non existent.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Narcissist, yes.

Sociopath? Come on. There are plenty of stories of his generosity. That doesn't come close to making him a good guy, he's not a sociopath.
Jim in CT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 02:08 PM   #48
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slipknot View Post
He certainly did not try to tell the truth about the IRS targeting conservatives. If you need links to timeline of his lies and cover ups, just search, it's all there on the internet.
The IRS wasn't targeting conservatives.
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 02:11 PM   #49
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
For Gods sake man, Trump has a 4-star general who is a gold star father, as his right hand man. How on earth is it a character flaw, for Trump to seek his guidance, to make sure he is using the best words possible, when speaking to people who are grieving?
I thought Trump had spoken with nearly every family of those killed on duty? And now he needs coaching??? Doesn't make any sense. Oh wait, sure it does...it's called yet ANOTHER cover up story.
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 02:11 PM   #50
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnR View Post
  • If you like your health-care plan, you can keep it
  • If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor.
  • Benghazi was result of a video (it was a planned attack by local forces )
  • Calling ISIS the JV team and then saying he didn't
  • I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits, now or in the future.
  • Im proud of the fact that with two weeks to go, were probably the first administration in modern history that hasnt had a major scandal in the White House.
  • That the Obama Administration will be the most Transparent, ever.
  • He certainly lied on Hillary's email server - he knew.
  • And of course this winner: Hillary is most qualified presidential candidate in history
None of those are lies.
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 03:15 PM   #51
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,735
WDMSO--from your article:
Definition: Trickle-down economics is a theory that says benefits for the wealthy trickle down to everyone else. These benefits are usually tax cuts on businesses, high-income earners capital gains and dividends.


It is not an actual economic theory. Sowell, if you read the article I posted, said "No such theory has been found in even the most voluminous and learned histories of economic theories, Including J. A. Schumpeter's monumental 1260 page History of Economic Analysis. Yet this non-existent theory has become the object of denunciations from the pages of the New York Times and the Washington Post to the political arena. It has been attacked by Professor Paul Krugman of Princeton, and Professor Peter Corning of Stanford, among others, and similar attacks have been repeated as far away as India. It is a classic example of arguing against a caricature instead of confronting the argument actually made."

Further from your article:
Trickle-down economics assumes investors, savers and company owners are the real drivers of growth (they are real drivers, not the only drivers). It assumes they’ll use any extra cash from tax cuts to expand businesses. Investors will buy more companies or stocks. Banks will increase business lending. Owners will invest in their operations and hire workers. The theory says these workers will spend their wages, driving demand and economic growth.

This caricature, not theory, oversimplifies what is assumed. The reason tax RATES were originally lowered under Coolidge was because the rates were so high that it was more profitable for investors and businesses to put money into tax shelters. The assumption was that lowering tax rates would encourage the money holders to return to making profit by spending on those things that grow business rather than sheltering the money for dividends and tax evasion. When such tax cuts under Coolidge, Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush were made, less money was put into tax shelters and was spent on business growth, and the economy did expand and the federal government actually received greater tax income. Saying that the results might have been because of other factors, therefor merely coincidental, is not convincing when the result occurred every time the tax rates were lowered.


Further from your article:
Trickle-down economic theory is similar to supply-side economics. That theory states that all tax cuts, whether for businesses or workers, spur economic growth. Trickle-down theory is more specific. It says targeted tax cuts work better than general ones.

Wait . . . I thought that "targeted tax cuts" are what Progressive economists like. Oh, that's right, they are the true believers in trickle down, government trickle down economics--from government to the masses.


Further from your article:
It [trickle down] advocates cuts to corporations, capital gains and savings taxes. It doesn't promote across-the-board tax cuts. Instead, the tax cuts go to the wealthy.

But Trump's, and Bush's, and Reagan's tax cuts were across-the-board cuts. So they must not be considered trickle down. Your article is very confusing.


Further from your article:
Did It Work?
During the Reagan Administration, it seemed like trickle-down economics worked.

But it wasn't trickle down. It was across-the-board tax cuts.

His policies, known as Reaganomics, helped end the 1980 recession.

Trickle-down economics was not the only (Oh, "not the only"--so it was part of the equation?) reason for the recovery, though. Reagan also increased government spending by 2.5 percent a year.
That almost tripled the federal debt. It grew from $997 billion in 1981 to $2.85 trillion in 1989. Most of the new spending went to defense. It supported Reagan's successful efforts to end the Cold War and bring down the Soviet Union. Trickle-down economics, in its pure form, was never tested. (Because there is no such theory of economics. It doesn't exist.) It's just as likely that massive government spending ended the recession.

Every time the rates were lowered, economy was spurred. But not every time massive government spending occurred (without tax cuts) did the economy respond--at best it remained stagnant as in Obama. Or worse as in Franklin Roosevelt. So why is it just as likely that massive government spending ended the recession? What historical evidence is there for such a "just as likely" scenario?

Further from your article:
President George W. Bush used trickle-down theory to address the 2001 recession. He cut income taxes with EGTRRA. That ended the recession by November of that year.
But unemployment rose to 6 percent. That often occurs, because unemployment is a lagging indicator.

It takes time for companies to start hiring again, even after a recession has ended. Nevertheless, Bush cut business taxes with JGTRRA in 2003.
It appeared that the tax cuts worked. But, at the same time, the Federal Reserve lowered the fed funds rate. It fell from 6 percent to 1 percent. It's unclear . . .

If it's unclear, what is the argument against tax cuts? And your author admits that the initial Bush tax cuts ended the recession by November, and that the rise to 6% unemployment was the result of the past recession--it was a lagging indicator.


. . . whether tax cuts or another monetary policy caused the recovery.

If the other monetary policy is low fed rates, then why did the economy resist recovering under Obama's several years of extremely low Federal Reserve rates? Again, where is the empirical, historical evidence that low fed rates are the cause of economic recovery?

Further from your article:
Trickle-down economics says that Reagan's lower tax rates should have helped people in all income levels. (it did.) In fact, the opposite occurred. (No, all income levels were helped. And, oh, BTW, it was not, by the author's own definition, not Trickle-down, it was across-the-board.) Income inequality worsened. (worsened is a value judgment. If all are financially improved, but some more than others, that is not an inherently bad or "worse" thing. And to expect that there should be a dollar for dollar equivalency in gains between different scales of income is ridiculous. What the difference should be may be debatable, but if all are actually better off is not debatable, it is a fact.) Between 1979 and 2005, after-tax household income rose 6 percent for the bottom fifth. That sounds great (It was great.) until you see what happened for the top fifth. Their income increased by 80 percent. The top 1 percent saw their income triple. Instead of trickling down, it appears that prosperity trickled up.

So if it took a lowering of the tax rate to achieve 80 percent or more income at the top in order to get a 6 percent increase at the bottom, it would be better just to stay in recession? And how much of that greater income gain at the top made it possible or favorable for the top to spend and invest in ways that spurred the economy thus make it feasible to rise out of recession and aid the bottom to get their 6 percent. If the bottom got their tax rate lowered, and the top did not get a low enough tax rate to invest in spending rather than hiding money in tax shelters, would the economy have improved or would it have remained stagnant thus depriving the bottom of the chance to gain a six percent rise in income or greater chance of employment?

Despite its shortcomings, Republicans use trickle-down economic theory to guide policy. In 2017, Republican President Donald Trump proposed cutting taxes for the wealthy. (He is proposing an across-the-board cut in taxes--which by your author's definition, is not "Trickle down.") He also wants to end taxes on capital gains and dividends for everyone making less than $50,000 a year. (That's another tax reduction at the bottom end of wage earners.) Trump's tax plan would reduce the corporate tax rate to 15 percent. That's been upped to 25 percent) He said it would boost growth enough to make up for the debt increase.

Nothing in your article, nor in historical evidence, says that he is wrong. Generally, debt increases because of spending. Cutting taxes has historically led to (or consistently "coincided" with) increased federal tax revenue. Your article doesn't dispute that. So, if the federal government gets more revenue, how does that increase the debt? It will increase only if spending increases beyond the ability to pay for the spending.

Your article finishes with:
In 2010, the Tea Party movement rode into power during the midterm elections. They wanted to cut government spending and taxes. As a result, Congress extended the Bush tax cuts, even for those making $250,000 or more.

Sowell's article ends with:
"Even when empirical evidence substantiates the arguments made for cuts in tax rates, such facts are not treated as evidence relevant to testing a disputed hypothesis, but as isolated curiosities. Thus, when tax revenues rose in the wake of the tax rate cuts made during the George W. Bush administration, the New York Times reported: 'An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the projected budget deficit this year.' Expectations, of course, are in the eye of the beholder. However surprising the increases in tax revenues may have been to the New York Times, they are exactly what proponents of reducing high tax rates have been expecting, not only from these particular tax rate cuts, but from similar reductions in high tax rates at various times going back more than three-quarters of a century. To the extent that the American economy has changed since the time of Andrew Mellon, it has changed in ways that make it even easier for wealthy investors to escape high tax rates. A globalized economy makes overseas investments a readily available alternative to buying taxexempt bonds domestically. Even if the domestic tax rate is not 'high' by historic standards, what matters now is whether it is high compared to tax rates in other countries to which large sums of money can be readily sent electronically. Meanwhile, unemployed workers cannot nearly so readily relocate to other countries to take the jobs created there by American investments fleeing higher tax rates at home."

I'll wrap up this long reply to you by saying that your article does not address what Sowell says. Your article deflects from the true nature of reduced tax rates into some mythic theory of "Trickle down economics." Reduced tax rates encourage and enable needed money to stay at home rather than going abroad. Reduced tax rates are not based on the assumption that people will react as your author says. Rather, they are based on where, historically, money goes when rates are too high. They are based on evidence, not assumption.

From your response, it sounds as if you didn't read Sowell's article, or if you did, you do not understand it. More's the pity.

Last edited by detbuch; 10-29-2017 at 09:38 AM..
detbuch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 04:57 PM   #52
Raider Ronnie
www.blackhullcharters.com
iTrader: (0)
 
Raider Ronnie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: On my boat
Posts: 8,936
Send a message via AIM to Raider Ronnie
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
The IRS wasn't targeting conservatives.

Bull#^&#^&#^&#^&.
The Tea Party are conservatives and they were certainly targeted by the IRS on orders
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Raider Ronnie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 05:39 PM   #53
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raider Ronnie View Post
Bull#^&#^&#^&#^&.
The Tea Party are conservatives and they were certainly targeted by the IRS on orders
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Hahahahahaha nope.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 06:27 PM   #54
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
The IRS wasn't targeting conservatives.
Funny, the DOJ concluded otherwise, and settled lawsuits with conservative groups who were victimized. If Obama said the earth was flat, would you believe it?
Jim in CT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 06:28 PM   #55
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
I thought Trump had spoken with nearly every family of those killed on duty? And now he needs coaching??? Doesn't make any sense. Oh wait, sure it does...it's called yet ANOTHER cover up story.
Do you wear your tinfoil hat to bed at night?
Jim in CT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 06:30 PM   #56
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
None of those are lies.
He sure was wrong a lot, about some big things. Possibly not lies, but a lot of yuuge mistakes.

How about when he said the McCain campaign was going to make people afraid that Obama was black?
Jim in CT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2017, 09:41 PM   #57
The Dad Fisherman
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
The Dad Fisherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 15,665
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
None of those are lies.
So you're saying he was stupid?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
The Dad Fisherman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2017, 07:37 AM   #58
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,354
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman View Post
So you're saying he was stupid?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
This is what is known, as backing someone into a corner, from which there is literally no escape.
Jim in CT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2017, 09:13 AM   #59
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 1,519
love all the defection But but Hillary or But but Obama . rather than answers the issues at hand and the behavior

What abut the GOP and SALT in their tax cut

The deduction reduces income taxes for millions of families across the country. Nationwide, almost 30 percent of taxpayers benefit — and at least 17 percent of households in every state benefit. The Republican tax plan would eliminate the deduction, which disproportionately benefits the upper middle class, largely to help pay for tax cuts for the very wealthy.

or attacks on 401K's

All theses things may or may not happen the issue is that that are even talking about it which clears shows me they dont care about the avg Joe or the Middle class and many here have been blinded by their BS and once again support a plan and party and POTUS that goes against their own self interest

ignore comments from Republicans against Trump and excuse them away

Reckless, outrageous, and undignified behavior has become excused and countenanced as “telling it like it is,” when it is actually just reckless, outrageous, and undignified. Jeff flake

"Helping inspire divisions because it generates support from your political base is not a formula for causing our nation to advance, our nation to overcome the many issues we have to deal with right now," Corker said.

Donald Trump hasn’t shown the stability or competency to succeed as president, Corker


Trumps lack of service John McCain

"One aspect of the conflict, by the way, that I will never, ever countenance is that we drafted the lowest income level of America, and the highest income level found a doctor that would say they had a bone spur. That is wrong. That is wrong. If we are going to ask every American to serve, every American should serve."


direction of Trump vision John McCain

“They (europe) would be alarmed by an increasing turn away from universal values and toward old ties of blood, and race, and sectarianism. They would be alarmed by the hardening resentment we see toward immigrants, and refugees, and minority groups, especially Muslims. They would be alarmed by the growing inability, and even unwillingness to separate truth from lies. They would be alarmed that more and more of our fellow citizens seem to be flirting with authoritarianism and romanticizing it as our moral equivalent.”

now these men once pillars of the GOP are seen a Traitors by trumps base and some here towards the Supreme leader Donald Trump these things are all happening closing one eyes and plugging your ears and closing one mouth only shows support for the madness displayed .. dont blame the media or the fake news or liberals just look in the mirror if you want to blame anyone .... and repeat the conservative mantra its all about personal responsibility.. its the Fable of the Snake

One winter a farmer (voter)found a snake (Trump)stiff and frozen with cold. He had compassion on it, and taking it up, placed it in his bosom. The warmth quickly revived the Snake, and resuming its natural instincts, bit its benefactor, inflicting on him a mortal wound.

Last edited by wdmso; 10-29-2017 at 09:22 AM..
wdmso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2017, 09:56 AM   #60
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 16,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
Funny, the DOJ concluded otherwise, and settled lawsuits with conservative groups who were victimized. If Obama said the earth was flat, would you believe it?
They found the IRS acted improperly out of convenience, not political motivation.
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright 2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com