Please log in to view images

« prev   random   next »

1
1

Next time you think both parties are the same...

By tatupu70 follow tatupu70   2014 Jan 21, 10:18am 4,435 views   15 comments   watch   nsfw   quote   share    


Exhibit A:

http://news.yahoo.com/republican-party-vote-repeal-u-anti-tax-dodging-234904778--sector.html

"The Republican Party is expected to approve a resolution this week, calling for repeal of an Obama administration law that is designed to crack down on offshore tax dodging."

Republicans--the party of tax dodgers!

#politics

1   MrEd   ignore (1)   2014 Jan 21, 11:02am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

A symbolic gesture at best. Has no chance of passing.

2   Tenpoundbass   ignore (15)   2014 Jan 21, 11:44am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Well it's not like Obama is putting it to good use.

Which crook do you care gets the spoils?

One carjacked grandma, but the other sucker punched playing the knock out game, now they are wrestling on the ground over grannies bountiful booty.

You're not calling the cops, you're just rooting on sides.

3   curious2   ignore (0)   2014 Jan 21, 5:10pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

The two parties differ noticeably.

Democrats appeal to the best in people: hopes and dreams, which, if elected, they betray.

Republicans appeal to the worst in people: fear and loathing, worst nightmares, which, if elected, they make real.

That isn't an endorsement of either major party, but as between the two, the Republicans are much worse.

4   bob2356   ignore (4)   2014 Jan 21, 6:54pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

The Professor says

It's all political theater.

Not totally. For once, even a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes, the republicans are right. FATCA costs far more to run than any lost tax revenue it brings in not even including huge amounts of lost business opportunities. FATCA is like so many of post 9/11 laws. A trojan horse that is all about control of the populace disguised as stopping tax evasion or promoting public safety. Stop and think for a minute about the reasons why the US government so desperately wants to account for every single cent and asset it's citizens own.

That doesn't mean the repugs actually believe in repealing FATCA. They want to control the populace just as badly is the dumbcrats, if not worse. They just want anything to oppose Obama.

5   Tenpoundbass   ignore (15)   2014 Jan 21, 11:31pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

The Professor says

There was Paul but he only got to talk after Gingrich and Santorum were finished. Political theater.

I don't know what election you were following, but Ron Paul never once got to speak on his behalf, both the Liberal news and FOX kicked the propaganda press in overdrive to drown out his message of sensibility.

90% of the people knew Ron Paul was psycho maniac, and was crazy as a loon. But when asked what about his policy and issues made them reach that conclusion they could only quote that one of the networks said so.

You guys bitch about the GOP PACs but have no problem at all wagging the Dog via any means necessary. That's why I laugh every time I hear someone bitch about FOX news or the Koch brothers, ect... For everyone of those entities that the GOP has, the Dems have a 100.

6   FortWayne   ignore (4)   2014 Jan 21, 11:36pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

MrEd says

A symbolic gesture at best. Has no chance of passing.

I hope so. There is way too much of that going on lately.

7   Shaman   ignore (3)   2014 Jan 22, 12:43am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

An who the duck wanted Gingrich for President? The guy is the most collossal blowhard who ever disgraced himself in DC! It was really transparent how the media (of both sides) gaslighted Paul and tried to drown him out with republican assholes while trying as hard as they could to make something about racism stick. The GOP didn't want him because he would shake up their country club and evoke some change for the people. The Democrats didn't want him because his ideas were dangerous to their philosophy of total government support of everyone, and he would have beat the socks off of Obama had the GOP ticket not been stolen from him by that Mormon vulture capitalist.

8   Tenpoundbass   ignore (15)   2014 Jan 22, 1:50am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The Professor says

Paul talked to those that would listen. The republican debates were a farce. In order to drown out Paul they allowed all those guys without a chance of winning to join in as if they had a chance.

More over he would be cut off with in seconds of saying the first few sensible words, but they would let Newt and Romney drone on and on, with no end in sight.
The debates are worthless, especially the ones where the media gets to lay out the issues on the bed like today's outfit by a dotting parent.

We're fucking starving, sick, out of work, kicked to the streets, and just all out abandoned by our Government, and they are debating the legal definition of marriage, and why more people aren't insured in a system, that only few can afford. Which their proposed solution is to increase insurance costs to the insured.

They should round up the unemployed and the misplaced and fill the room with them, to bark out the 3rde degree, to the Presidential suspects.

9   tatupu70   ignore (0)   2014 Jan 22, 2:20am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I don't understand the fascination with Ron Paul. Sure, he's for smaller government--which I know gets many people excited. But have you seen his economic proposals?

Cut corporate taxes
Allow companies to repatriate captial without additional taxation
permanently extend Bush tax cuts
eliminate capital gains and dividends taxes
eliminate estate and gift taxes
end taxes on personal savings

That looks right out of the 1%ers wet dream. Why does anyone think he's for the middle class???

10   anonymous   ignore (null)   2014 Jan 22, 2:28am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Who gives a fuck about the middle class whiners that are always crying foul, demanding they be given more. Where's a candidate that will fight for us working class folk

11   Tenpoundbass   ignore (15)   2014 Jan 22, 2:39am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Well it depends on what else you do as far as job creation goes.
I would be all for that, is the companies were expected to spend more on income, and corporate negative growth reactions started at the top down.

Give companies more incentives to grow businesses for no other reason than producing products and contributing to a healthy employment numbers and economy. Also place an agency that reviews growth plans for any publicly traded company, to insure that those plans will spawn positive growth. And not be used a funnel to siphon money from the corporation into executives pockets and pet companies. Then it's the 401K investors left holding the bag, when those companies have over saturated their markets, or built locations in locations that would have never supported those locations.

Every one took what he said out of context, but there was more to what he was saying. He's right, companies should be driving the economy, for all citizens not just for the Executive class, who build these companies up, create a buzz, everyone invests in those companies then the top management pillages the spoils, sending the 401K working investors, back to square on rebuilding their nest egg.

While the government just turns a blind eye, while threatening more taxes, that does dick all for anyone but their corporate sponsors.

12   NoCoupForYou   ignore (4)   2014 Jan 22, 2:49am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

CaptainShuddup says

90% of the people knew Ron Paul was psycho maniac, and was crazy as a loon. But when asked what about his policy and issues made them reach that conclusion they could only quote that one of the networks said so.

I hear you, Captain.

I've always wondered, where and when does the "Media Extremist Council" meet? Who determines what ideas are extreme and who is an extremist? Are they appointed by Les Moonves or Ban Ki-Moon or the FCC or what?

Because the US Media is awfully shy about appearing biased, to the point of regurgitating Think Tank/Gov't talking points without bothering to check the validity of the claims. I couldn't imagine they would label people "Extreme" without some kind of objective standard.

Putting Paul aside, why are certain ideas like single-payer extreme, when they have been functioning for three generations in Europe, Asia, and Australia and produce slightly better results with far less cost (ie substantially more efficient than private insurance)?

Why is trying to reduce "Defense" Spending, which eats up much of the discretionary spending and a huge chunk of the federal budget, considered "extreme"? Why is it extreme proposing that US Troops not be deployed in more than half the countries in the world? Why is it that opposition to one-sided, one-way free trade with protectionist countries is called "Extreme"?

I want to meet this "Media Extremist Council" and find the "Guidelines to Extremism" document the media is using.

13   curious2   ignore (0)   2014 Jan 22, 3:06am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Quigley says

who the duck wanted Gingrich for President?

The answer is clear, but you might not like it. While being investigated for possible violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, Sheldon Adelson financed Newt Gingrich and then Mitt Romney. Gingrich having divorced his first two wives, his "family values" included saying that his sister shouldn't be allowed to get married at all, because she's gay. Gingrich embodied literally most of the cardinal sins, being a gluttonous adulterer wallowing proudly in luxury, but got endorsed by prominent Southern Baptists and won the South Carolina primary, either because of donations from Adelson or because he wasn't a Mormon. Perhaps the 2016 GOP ticket might be Christie/Gingrich, in order to gobble up the obese vote, which is a rapidly expanding demographic.

14   rdm   ignore (3)   2014 Jan 22, 3:10am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

bob2356 says

FATCA costs far more to run than any lost tax revenue it brings in not even including huge amounts of lost business opportunities.

Are you clairvoyant? The article says its effective date has been delayed until July 1st.

15   HEY YOU   ignore (8)   2014 Jan 22, 4:46am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Rep/Con/Teas would not have to dodge taxes if they would take away all Big Govt. subsidies & entitlements from all the Socialist Teat Sucking
Rep/Con/Teas.


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions