How to Pay Down the Deficit with no tax increase

Good one obie!

No Obama would try to redistribute it first

That'd be the point, mavrick. The liars put money in to then redistribute to deficit reduction. If it wasn't redistributed, it would just go back to the people who paid into it to begin with, then what would be the point? I understand you were trying to make a "socialism" joke, but it kind of failed on this one. Try harder.

No Obama would try to redistribute it first

Seriously? Bush's redistribution has practically killed the middle and lower classes and just made the rich richer, but that's acceptable to you mavrick03, right? But redistribution to the middle and lower classes is horrible and should never happen, is that how you see it?

Why is it called "redistribution" when it might actually help those at the bottom and called "trickle down economic policy" when it helps those on top?

Why is it called "redistribution" when it might actually help those at the bottom and called "trickle down economic policy" when it helps those on top?

Really kj031056-1? Why on earth would you post something so logical? My goodness girl, what are you smoking? LOL

((Hugs))

Well, I'm going the "Trickle Up" Route.

In fact, right now I'm walking over to my neighbors house, who has a good job, and demand he pay me $ 40.00 every week, to mow his lawn, whether he likes it or not. If he tries to turn me down, I'll cut his hedges for $20.00 more.

I think I will. LOL!

For "Liberals" the trickle up part is:

Well, they understand, don't they.

I'm going over to my neighbor's house who has a great job making over 250K a year, mow his lawn and give him some more money, while I'm struggling to shelter and feed my family making 60K a year. That trickling up, I'm mean redistribution works so much better, wouldn't you say greg?

Your struggling at 60K a year.

Really?

Over did it, didn't you.

I just hit the 35K mark with my business, due to the downturn, and we pay our bills and feed our children with no problem at all.

We learned pretty fast, to live within our means, unlike the old days, when we could spend, spend, spend.

You see, that trickle up apparently didn't work either, when people spent constantly and big, just a few years ago.

Your struggling at 60K a year.

Really?

Over did it, didn't you

Depends on where Lola lives. 60K isn't much for a family if living in an area with a high COL.

If it's New York, or any other north eastern state, I get it.

But they do have really good programs for that. Of course, those programs are breaking the State. California is broke too, isn't it.

Is it California?

greg-709692 - Your struggling at 60K a year.

Really?

Over did it, didn't you.

greg, it's an analogy, do you know what an analogy is?

I'm not to sure how 60k would support a family, however I do know that you can live pretty darn good on 250K. I also know that my husband and I pay more than $7200 annually just for health care insurance, so that alone would take a pretty good bite out of a family with a 60k annual income. Also if you really wanted to be anal along with your snarky remark you could have said it's highly unlikely a family that brings in 60k annually would live in the neighborhood that houses a family with a 250k plus income, I suppose you didn't notice that irony though did you? Oh well.

BTW, my husband and I live rather comfortably.

LOL, Greg...by the way, when it is approved, I will be a member.

greg, it's an analogy, do you know what an analogy is?

greg, you must be a dumbA$$ to not know that she was just making up that figure of 60K...

~sarc~

OK, I withdraw my support given in #2.12. BS is BS, whichever side it comes from. If you sell an example as a personal experience, make it be one. Otherwise, say it's just an example.

Dennis270 - Make it be one you say? Yes, I'm sure greg;

From Post# 2.7 - "In fact, right now I'm walking over to my neighbors house, who has a good job, and demand he pay me $ 40.00 every week, to mow his lawn, whether he likes it or not. If he tries to turn me down, I'll cut his hedges for $20.00 more."

Was greg trying to make a point through his example or did he really do what he stated in post# 2.7?

It was an example, and I clearly understood that.

@ Lola:

greg, it's an analogy, do you know what an analogy is?

Pencil ready. How do you spell it?

while I'm struggling to shelter and feed my family making 60K a year

Leave that part out next time. Would have made a better sarcastic analogy.

@ Vol:

greg, you must be a dumbA$$ to not know that she was just making up that figure of 60K...

My E.S.P. was in sleep mode, I guess.

greg-709692 - In fact, right now I'm walking over to my neighbors house, who has a good job, and demand he pay me $ 40.00 every week, to mow his lawn, whether he likes it or not. If he tries to turn me down, I'll cut his hedges for $20.00 more.

Leave that part out next time, I wouldn't have responded in like. I know it's tough but you'll get it eventually.

Don't have an idea of your own, do you!

Dems. always have that problem. Fall back to what's working for others, instead of coming up with a real working idea of their own.

Sorry it went over your head, I'll dumb it down next time, so you can understand it better.

Here we go.

Another "Brain Surgeon" that can't figure out how to stitch up a "1 stitch" cut!

Not theirs! Their pockets are full of our money.

Their checks would bounce....remember Rubbergate?

Heck I would say we would be debt free by the end of the year this year and that is if we started it today.

I was going to say...we have elections coming up. That series of bullcrap alone could not only put us ahead of the national debt figure, but would probably allow us to re-institute that whole "pension" thing I hear about from prior generations...

Think of all the bills and programs that would not be offered up and thereto the spending that wouldn't take place because they can sell it to the public without at least stretching the truth.

But typical of a liberal idiot that thinks their party doesnt lie.

Pete520 = Liberal Idiot

My party lies, too, okay?

But the last I checked, there hasn't been a lie so tangible that it killed over 4,000 American troops.

Some lies are worth more than $10...

F.W., beware of glass ceilings .....

The bottom line as kjmgirl stated both parties lie, and both parties lie alot. I just wish we could have a decent 3rd party that wouldnt do the bull malarky they do, but realistically that is just the way politicians are. And until we get sick of it enough to realize are system isnt working and tear it down and rebuild it, there isnt much we can do but put up with it.

AKCS what the heck does beware of glass ceilings mean.

I think they meant glass house.....

and pete520...."my parties lies aren't as bad as YOUR parties lies, na na na na boo boo"

Seriously? The dems voted to go to war in Iraq too...A FACT most choose to ignore in the Bush hating parade. Bush needs to take plenty of blame as the "leader" at that time. But be clear, he could not declare war...only congress can. Remember Kerry "I was for the war before I was against it"

Just more political double speak. BOTH sides do it. Both sides are responsible for the lives in Iraq. Face it.

Seriously? The dems voted to go to war in Iraq too...

I wasn't commenting on who voted to go to war...yes, the dems did vote on it, but why did they vote on it? Evidently, Saddam Hussein was looking to buy yellowcake uranium to share with al quada and blow up more American cities. Who wouldn't vote for that?

The vote wasn't the lie...the information provided prior to the vote was a lie.

By the way, nobody declared war. The Bush Doctrine, which is what was voted on, gave the President's office the power to start a war without Congress declaring war.

Remember Kerry "I was for the war before I was against it"

I'll fill in the blanks..."I was for the war when the President told us that Hussein was shopping for yellowcake uranium to blow us up...I was against it when I found out that this was mythology."

Yes, but congress didn't declair war. Bush sidestepped congress by invoking the War Powers Act, which plainly states (res 21) that a President, when he feels the country is in iminant danger, can declair war without the approval of congress. Also, congress passed another res (600 something) which stated a time limit in which Hussein had to provide unfettered access to weapons inspectors.

The majority of congress protested the war, Dem and Repubs, and Bush launched the attack on his own.

Wow. The intel on Hussein was already being gathered during the Clinton years.

He bluffed and stalled to put the fear in Iran and us. He made it look like he had it or was procuring it. He said so himself. He never thought we would invade. So it was Hussein lying not the Whitehouse.

Enough to FOOL our intelligence agencies. Which btw are non-partisan. THEY briefed congress NOT the President.

What I blame Bush for was his lack of leadership and patience. Diplomacy would have worked. It would have kept Iran in check.

What I refuse to do is absolve a political party (dems) because they had a case of Monday morning quarterback.

Pete...if you are calling our intelligence agents liars. I have a problem with that. I also didn't know you had some insight to "fill in the blanks" that the rest of us did not have.

Alan,

They protested what they had already voted for. They mis-judged Bush's lack of patience and his weakness on diplomacy. You don't give a 15 yr old the keys to the car and THEN tell him not to drive. That's dumb.

Holy crap..we told him he could go to war, and he actually did? Bush's problem was not that he was dumb as the extreme left would have you believe. It was he was inflexible and once he made up his mind, there was no changing it. Ask Colin Powell. Heck if we had listened to him, Iraq would have been solved quicker regardless of the motive to go in. He knew we would need to occupy it. Bush and Rumsfield disagreed. Colin resigned. He was right they were wrong.

Pete...if you are calling our intelligence agents liars. I have a problem with that. I also didn't know you had some insight to "fill in the blanks" that the rest of us did not have.

Just the opposite, if I may? The intelligence report showed that the "yellowcake" story and documents were false. The Administration wanted to discredit the operative, Valerie Plame Wilson, and in their attempt, leaked her name to the press. There was this big trial and stink over it, perhaps you missed it. At any rate, Bush/Cheney continued to push the nuke story, even after the CIA investigation proved it was false.

Thanks, Alan. You beat me to it.

I hate that people (mostly Cheney) are pushing the "falty intelligence" claim. That is the guy that BC-Patriot needs to be upset with. It is Cheney calling the CIA a bunch of idiots, not the left.

not faulty...flawed.

Here is my disclaimer- I am not a bush cheney fan

so let me get you point straight. Bush/Cheney convinced the intelligence community to lie to congress?

I know people who were part of that, and it that is absolute crap. There were failures in the communication between agencies. duplicate work with different results of data. throw into the mix Hussein's intentional lying as well as Bush wanting to jump the shark at the first moment he could and you get he end result.

I think I agreed with the premise that Bush WANTED to go in. He honestly believed (not lied about) he would find the WMD's. He was dumbfounded when they were not there. THAT was the problem with Bush. It wasn't deception, it was looking at several agencies info, and believing the one that fit his opinion. regardless of the Valeries of the world. Hers was one report out of many. Hers was also submitted after congress gave authorization. Her being outed by Cheney's office was to try to minimize the obvious embarrasment her report could cause the whitehouse. Looks like congress wanted to believe the other reports initially as well.

You didn't seem to argue with the 15 yr old driver analogy?

So off topic, but here is my biggest problem with Bush besides not funding two wars.

Reagan- cut some taxes but raised key ones like capital gains. result 16,000,000 jobs created

Clinton- raised some taxes across the board-result over 30,000,000 jobs created

Bush II- cut taxes across the board and increased spending- result 3,000,000 jobs created

These were over the duration of their 8 yr terms.

Tax cuts to the rich do NOT create jobs. What they do is prolong the deficit. Obama was right when he said the math does not work with tax cuts to the rich.

One problem with the "PLaim Game" is that Bush went out prior to confirming the validity of the yellowcake documents. Then, after V returned and filed her report, Bush and Cheney continued to use the yellowcake story to sell the war. "We know for a fact that Saddam Husein has attempted to purchase yellowcake uranium from Niger". They even had the audacity to discredit our ally, France, who also knew the story and documents were fake. Of course Mr. Wilson could say nothing to the rest of congress or America because of the nature of his wife's work, openly that is.

I actually agree with the fifteen yr old analogy.

I got another one for ya: "Would you like to play a game"?

I agree with most of what you propose, blueball. We need to not only cut the Czars, we need to cut all of the Administration positions. Most of these people are promoted for being inefficient and not actually for doing an outstanding job.

We'd have to make sure that we don't reduce the Pentagon's research and development budget though, we need to keep pushing our technological frontier. One way of actually reducing the budget is to stop forcing the Pentagon to bid on nuts, bolts, tools, and other hardware they can get cheaper at a hardware store. As for the bases, we need to keep a few bases to use as forward operating positions in case of war or need to help in a disaster. However, we should close quite a few of the foreign bases.

Russia and Cuba both commie nations are cutting their bloated government...one would think we could have as much sense as they do, but NO!

You do realize Pelosi doesn't drink alcohol, don't you? Stop listening to Bachmann, she's an idiot and it's rubbing off.

You do realize Pelosi doesn't drink alcohol, don't you?

Must be the plastic surgery pill's then.

She's a "Nut" fading in and out of our dimension.

That's the problem with republicans, they believe anything that comes out of the mouth of a batsh_t crazy nut-job like Bachmann, look how many fall at the feet of Palin.

And look at how many are rolling away from the Feet of the likes of Pelosi, Reid, Boxer and Obama.

Democrats won't even put a "D" next to their name in their commercials.

What does that tell you!

Keep grasping at straws, it only makes you look foolish.

Ouch!

Ya Got me!

ROTFLMAO!

>> We need to not only cut the Czars, we need to cut all of the Administration positions

We then need to create a Monica Lewinski Cabinet position. She kept Bill from meddling too much and that's exactly what we need.

yeah, but then they'd vote themselves a pay raise to cover the costs of what they put in the jar...

Russ Feingold wouldn't.......

Russ Feingold wouldn't.......

don't bet the house on it...

For a nominal fee of 1% per year, I'll um volunteer some of my free time and promise to keep good accounting records........

Well - somebody has to monitor whether the politicos have actually ponied up what they owe. After all, if we simply asked them if they paid up - well ...

markpup,

I think you need the liar jar for the California State Legislators.

tomwcraig - I was assuming they count OMG what you said's an understatement. I seriously can't believe other states have Legislatures more irresponsible than ours but I'll defer that judgement to my fellow countrymen from other states.

Luckily, I only have experience from the slightly better legislatures of Pennsylvania and Oregon.

Jar Jar Binks

LMAO!

Good one!

kjmgirl

Right on baby!