Not to get political, but...
 

[URL="http://news.yahoo.com/photo/061208/ids_photos_wl/r470729295.jpg"]Seems like a smart kid...[/URL][URL="http://news.yahoo.com/photo/061208/ids_photos_wl/r470729295.jpg"]
[/URL]

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

Awesome. :biggthump

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

why does our president have to make the dumbest faces?

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[quote=dmek25;260640]why does our president have to make the dumbest faces?[/quote]

Cuz he is a spazmo

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[IMG]http://web.mit.edu/margret/www/myndir/comics/bush_chimp.jpg[/IMG]

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

is he related to curious george?

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

That's great, djnemo65! I especially like the one where they couldn't find a chimp making a face as stupid as george. LOL.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[QUOTE=Redskin;260644]Cuz he is a spazmo[/QUOTE]

I believe you meant to say any democrat is a spazmo.

Can we lock this thread now?

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[quote=jsarno;260678]I believe you meant to say any democrat is a spazmo.

Can we lock this thread now?[/quote]
still drinking the kool aid, huh?

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[quote=dmek25;260694]still drinking the kool aid, huh?[/quote]

Your kool-aid isn't any better.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[quote=cpayne5;260696]Your kool-aid isn't any better.[/quote]
how do you know until you have tried it?

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[QUOTE=dmek25;260730]how do you know until you have tried it?[/QUOTE]

We did...for many years.

I can tell you this, the answer is not to be found with a democrat. I'm no Bush fanatic, but in no way is he as bad as people say. The economy is booming at a rate that is record setting. The stock market is flourishing. Everyone is making more money than ever. So you have to ask yourself what you want out of your president? I want someone that helps the economy (check), puts more money in my pocket and take less money from me that I worked hard to earn (check), someone that is no pussy / understands the importance of protection (check), someone that helps keep interest rates low (check). There are several other small things I look for as well, such as someone that understands the importance of alternative fuels since our earth is at stake. No check for him or anyone that ran at this point. The ones I mentioned however, are only fundamental beliefs in a republican party. Show me a democrat that has those as their running themes (and mean it, no John Kerry's saying he won't raise taxes, but obviously never put pen to paper to figure that every tax payer would have to pay a minimum of $1200 more a year) and I'll vote for him. I am a registered Independant and have no party affiliations.
I also have a fundamental belief that just because you earn more shouldn't mean you get taxed more. What I mean by that is, if you make $200,000 or $20,000 we should all be taxed the SAME percentage. They need to put pen to paper and figure it out, but I would wager around 17-20% would more than cover it. Why should I, or anyone be punished for what I've accomplished? I was raised VERY poor! Pretty much because my father was a lazy bastard. It took me 9 years, but I got a bachelor's degree on my own, with my own money. Had to work to afford it. Then I went for the throat and got a master's on my own. I came from nothing, and I made something of myself, and the democrats believe I should be punished for that. Of course, they won't say that, they'll say to help the less fortunate. But I was the less fortunate, and I worked my ass off to change my future. So why should I be taxed more than a guy that has no initiative?
My mother is a democrat and we argue constantly about politics to the point that we don't want to speak to each other after we're done. She's someone that believes in hand outs, I am someone who beleives in self responsibility.

Alright, a button was pushed...sorry guys...but like I said, it's probably time to shut this thread down.
If you beleive this thread was nothing but a joke, think again, the first post says "smart kid", referring to a kid that is crying because Bush is holding him. Then the monkey's next to Bush. This is a Bush bashing thread.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[quote=jsarno;260752]I want someone that helps the economy (check)[/quote]
Bush's idea of "creating jobs" is to fire gov't employees and hire contractors to replace them. Then he says "Hey, I made the gov't smaller [U]and[/U] I created new jobs!" It's an artificial construct.

[quote=jsarno;260752]puts more money in my pocket and take less money from me that I worked hard to earn (check)[/quote]
Yes, if you are in the top 2% wage earners in the country. He jacked up taxes on the other 98% to help pay for his record deficit spending.

[quote=jsarno;260752]someone that is no pussy / understands the importance of protection (check)[/quote]
Putting a gun in the hands of a bigoted, militant town idiot does not make me feel safer.

[quote=jsarno;260752]someone that helps keep interest rates low (check)[/quote]
If you are talking about prime, that's just about back up to where it was when he took office.

[quote=jsarno;260752]There are several other small things I look for as well, such as someone that understands the importance of alternative fuels since our earth is at stake. No check for him or anyone that ran at this point.[/quote]
I agree 100%. Gore is probably the biggest pusher of alternative fuels out there, but it's a tough sell that is going to take 10-15 years of presidencies to implement.

[quote=jsarno;260752]The ones I mentioned however, are only fundamental beliefs in a republican party.[/quote]
You must realize, though, that Bush is [U]not[/U] a Republican, in the classic sense of the party. Small federal gov't (i.e., minimal intrusion into the lives of individuals at the national level) is the mainstay. Reagen really pushed the strong national defense element, but that is a recent edition, too. Bush, however, is a Moral Majority Republican, who is willing to spend like the Dems in their heyday and stick big gov't into every facet of individuals' lives in order to push his personal religious beliefs. That's not a Republican.

[quote=jsarno;260752]I also have a fundamental belief that just because you earn more shouldn't mean you get taxed more. What I mean by that is, if you make $200,000 or $20,000 we should all be taxed the SAME percentage. They need to put pen to paper and figure it out, but I would wager around 17-20% would more than cover it. Why should I, or anyone be punished for what I've accomplished?[/quote]
I agree, but this would mean removing all of the tax shelters for the rich, which Bush won't do.

[quote=jsarno;260752]Alright, a button was pushed...sorry guys...but like I said, it's probably time to shut this thread down.
If you beleive this thread was nothing but a joke, think again, the first post says "smart kid", referring to a kid that is crying because Bush is holding him. Then the monkey's next to Bush. This is a Bush bashing thread.[/quote]
The thread is a joke, at Bush's expense.

All that said, the Dems certainly don't have an answer right now. The entire party is reactionary, and there hasn't been an original thought out of them since the middle of Clinton's second term. It's turning into the Hatfield-McCoys feud - everyone is so worked up over fighting the other side, they don't remember what the fight is about.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets;260770]All that said, the Dems certainly don't have an answer right now. The entire party is reactionary, and there hasn't been an original thought out of them since the middle of Clinton's second term. It's turning into the Hatfield-McCoys feud - everyone is so worked up over fighting the other side, they don't remember what the fight is about.[/QUOTE]

There is a TON to comment on with what you said, some inaccurate info...but I will only comment on the above...
I agree.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[quote=jsarno;260796]There is a TON to comment on with what you said, some inaccurate info...but I will only comment on the above...
I agree.[/quote]

LOL - I'm sure it can be spin, but it's accurate.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets;260803]LOL - I'm sure it can be spin, but it's accurate.[/QUOTE]

The tax comment is grossly inaccurate.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

I Agree that a Dem is not the answer, but bush is a spazmo with his faces. I probably am one of the few young people who say they do not hate bush and that bush is in fact not doing as bad as others would have it appear.

Anyways this turned very political very fast for just being a post of a funny picture and I would rather discuss me redskins especially after such a great win.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

How bout them Skins down in nawlins today, fellas?

Seriously, I think that arguing politics on TWP does two things...
* makes everyone look stupid
* makes everyone angry

The sun comes up in the morning and politics on TWP is just stupid. It's just one of those things that never changes no matter how hard you try.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[quote=Redskin;261119]I Agree that a Dem is not the answer, but bush is a spazmo with his faces....[/quote]

Well, if you take enough pictures, you'll end up with a few that can make anyone look like a "spazmo". Examples of this phenomenon appear every week in Nat'l Enquirer :)

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

What's this tax cut everyone speaks of? I'm single and I am getting rapped to the tune of about 18K a year in taxes. The only thing keeping Uncle Sam from sodomizing me some more with a dildo while he takes a rest is my home. And if that wasn't enough, when Uncle Sam isn't having his way with me, the state is for owning a home.

So yea, as far as I am concerned the Tax cut total BS. The way I see it, the "middle class" people are getting $300 checks and the rich guys are getting their capital gains tax reduced to 15%. Where is my god damn check to buy that new PS3 god damn it?

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[quote=jsarno;260969]The tax comment is grossly inaccurate.[/quote]
OK, it's probably closer to the top 5%, and the "increase" on the lower 80% of the people is a net effect, rather than a direct increase in the tax percentage. Same effect, though - the rich get richer and the poor pay a disproportionate share of their income.
[URL="http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0115-05.htm"]Connect the Dots, Folks: Bush Tax Cuts for Rich[/URL]

I'd love to see a flat tax, but it will never happen unfortunately. The Dems want to tax the rich to death and the Republicans want to protect them at all costs. Neither solution makes sense.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[quote=onlydarksets;261195]OK, it's probably closer to the top 5%, and the "increase" on the lower 80% of the people is a net effect, rather than a direct increase in the tax percentage. Same effect, though - the rich get richer and the poor pay a disproportionate share of their income.
[URL="http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0115-05.htm"]Connect the Dots, Folks: Bush Tax Cuts for Rich[/URL]

I'd love to see a flat tax, but it will never happen unfortunately. The Dems want to tax the rich to death and the Republicans want to protect them at all costs. Neither solution makes sense.[/quote]


Yea but a flat Tax will piss people off too, He has more money then me why am i paying the same ammount yayayaya.

And the country needs rich people to survive becuase they own and run businesses and if they go broke why we will be down shits creek my friend

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[QUOTE=Redskin;261294]Yea but a flat Tax will piss people off too, He has more money then me why am i paying the same ammount yayayaya.

And the country needs rich people to survive becuase they own and run businesses and if they go broke why we will be down shits creek my friend[/QUOTE]

I don't think anyone is saying tax the rich to death just tax them fairly. The question is what's fair. Flat tax certainly isn't the answer because the poor get hit hard. I think the current tax system is pretty good. Couple of things that bothers me about it is that there are lots of loop holes and ways for people to shelter their money from taxes. I don't think that is fair.

The other thing that bothers me is that the rich can take their after tax money invest it in the stock market, make a killing and not pay the same percentage in taxes as they would if the money was earned. That's totally fucked up. Yeah, the average Joe could do the same thing but you don't have to be a genius to realize the difference between the kind of money the average Joe can invest and 1+ million the rich guy has. And don't even get me started on the kind of treatment and breaks you get when you have that kind of money. You earn better on your money and brokers and managers constantly have their lips on your ass.

p.s. This country is where it is today because of the hard work of your average Joes and the Rich need the average Joes more so than the average Joe needs the rich. I don't now about you lot but I would be just as happy herding goats as much as working for a mega XYZ corporation. Life would go on.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

saden1, I don't think any suggested "flat tax" would truly be flat down to the last dollar. For example, see the Wikipedia entry:
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Possible_implementations]Flat tax - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url]

There are options, but I think the most important is, as you mention, to get away from these phony tax shelters that favor the extremely rich. Like you said, they get enough puckering from the private sector, they don't need it from the gov't, too.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

Political talks on TWP always end up so well. What's the over/under on when this thread gets so out of hand it needs to be locked? I say Tuesday. I'd love to say the win today and the Xmas season would keep people in good enough moods to hold on 'til Wednesday but I know better when it comes to the politcal threads.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[IMG]http://www.skinsfan.us/sf/files/retarted.jpg[/IMG]

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

Hey, if your face moves (unlike Nancy Pelosi and Michael Jackson's) and you're followed by cameras constantly...they're going to get pictures of you that look strange because they're in mid-speaking or when they catch you being surprised by the idiotic questions people ask you at press conferences.

Let's look at another major political figure:

[IMG]http://english.pravda.ru/img/2005/04/Clinton_Hillary_s.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://unixdude.blogspot.com/images/miserable-failure-hillary-clinton-button.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://www.no-treason.com/wild/hillary.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols2/hillary.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://www.israeluniverse.com/images/Hillary_Clinton.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://flatrock.org.nz/topics/money_politics_law/assets/hillary_clinton.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://blog.lewrockwell.com/lewrw/archives/bill_and_hillary_clinton-vi.jpg[/IMG]

[B]Now I must go gouge my eyeballs out with bleach-soaked forks. [/B]

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

That last pic is funny. They look like a couple coke head hippies. It's funny to think that one became our president for 8 years, and the other became a senator of New York. :doh:

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

Ok, let's lock this immature and idotic thread now. It's a FOOTBALL site.

Yeah, I'd want it locked if it was ANYONE we're giggling like pre-puberty boys about.

Go to a CNN or Al Jezeera board if you want to spend your day with this kind of crap.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[QUOTE=Buster;261513]Ok, let's lock this immature and idotic thread now. It's a FOOTBALL site.

Yeah, I'd want it locked if it was ANYONE we're giggling like pre-puberty boys about.

Go to a CNN or Al Jezeera board if you want to spend your day with this kind of crap.[/QUOTE]

Whaaa?! How can you comment on this thread, and then assert that it shouldn't be commented on? :confused:

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[QUOTE=Redskin;261119]I Agree that a Dem is not the answer, but bush is a spazmo with his faces. I probably am one of the few young people who say they do not hate bush and that bush is in fact not doing as bad as others would have it appear.

Anyways this turned very political very fast for just being a post of a funny picture and I would rather discuss me redskins especially after such a great win.[/QUOTE]

I'm sure that's why Dems now have control of the House and the Senate. What rhymes with Lame Duck President? Dubya.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[quote=GhettoDogAllStars;261515]Whaaa?! How can you comment on this thread, and then assert that it shouldn't be commented on? :confused:[/quote]

Whaaa! I was showing how stupid it is by showing the topic starter that people from his political party aren't so photogenic at times either.

Oh...not to get political.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[quote=dblanch66;261517]I'm sure that's why Dems now have control of the House and the Senate. What rhymes with Lame Duck President? Dubya.[/quote]

You've obviously ignored or never studied history...the mid-term in a President's second term ALWAYS goes to the other party.

The fact that the Dems only have a 1-seat lead in the Senate (and he's in the hospital possibly dying now) is enough proof that the nation doesn't really trust them so much. If they were really the answer, they would've really swung a huge majority.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[quote=Buster;261513]Ok, let's lock this immature and idotic thread now. It's a FOOTBALL site.

Yeah, I'd want it locked if it was ANYONE we're giggling like pre-puberty boys about.

Go to a CNN or Al Jezeera board if you want to spend your day with this kind of crap.[/quote]

Dude, it's the [U]Parking Lot.[/U] Read the home page - it's for "All off topic chatter". By your logic, almost every post in this forum should be locked. I'll make sure I get your approval for all future posts. :rolleyes:

FWIW, some of the pictures you posted are funny as well. But, apparently we can't laugh at them because "Buster didn't say it's OK."

[quote=Redskin]Anyways this turned very political very fast for just being a post of a funny picture and I would rather discuss me redskins especially after such a great win.[/quote]
Amen, at this point anyway.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[quote=Buster;261525]You've obviously ignored or never studied history...the mid-term in a President's second term ALWAYS goes to the other party.

The fact that the Dems only have a 1-seat lead in the Senate (and he's in the hospital possibly dying now) is enough proof that the nation doesn't really trust them so much. If they were really the answer, they would've really swung a huge majority.[/quote]

OK, now we're into a completely different topic. Since you bring it up, however, lets make sure you understand what actually happened in this election cycle.

Only 1/3 of the Senate is up for election every 2 years. Thus, this year, it was not the entire country voting on all 100 seats. There were only 33 seats (each third is a "class", and this was Class 1). Of those seats, 15 were R, and 18 were Dem+Independent (Independents have traditionally aligned with Dems). Thus, the Dems [U]already[/U] had a majority of the seats in Class 1, with 54.5%. After the election, the Rs had 9 seats, and the Dems+Independents had 22 seats, or 66.6% of the Class. Picking up 6 out of 15 seats (or, 40% of the seats the Dems could have possibly acquired), is not inconsequential, although what it actually means is a completely separate debate.

My point is that you shouldn't draw broad inferences about what the "country" wants, when only 1/3 of the country voted. Plus, we're mostly all idiots since we keep electing politicians to office. ;)

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

[QUOTE=Buster;261525]You've obviously ignored or never studied history...the mid-term in a President's second term ALWAYS goes to the other party.

The fact that the Dems only have a 1-seat lead in the Senate (and he's in the hospital possibly dying now) is enough proof that the nation doesn't really trust them so much. If they were really the answer, they would've really swung a huge majority.[/QUOTE]

Golly. You are right. I need to get more educated like you. I've never even thought of studying...what was that?...history. Keep living in your fantasy world. Winning BOTH the senate and the house does not ALWAYS go to the other party. check your facts. Either way, we only have a short while left of the biggest bozo in American history with the exception of maybe..TAFT.

Re: Not to get political, but...
 

Not to close a thread, but...