Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: blacken700 on September 18, 2012, 04:59:24 AM
-
found this thought it was about right
you are telling me that 47% (or 48% or 49%) of American households are dependent on the government because they pay no federal income taxes, therefore they consider themselves victims and are expecting housing, health care and whatever, at the government's expense. Also, you're not going to "worry about those people".
47% is quite a number, Mitt. Something like 160,000,000 or so.
That would mean a lot of people. Let's see, as I said, I'm not as smart as you, but that would mean all our wounded warriors who have come home with war related disabilities from WWII, Korea, Viet Nam, Iraq and Afghanistan. You remember those wars, your father supported WWII, but didn't fight it. You supported Viet Nam, but didn't fight it. You supported Iraq and Afghanistan, but none of your 5 boys fought there. So now that those who did fight for our country need our help either transitioning to a normal setting, or permanent help, due to a severe wound, you consider them free-loaders because they are part of the 47% that pay no federal income taxes. As I said, I'm not as smart as you, but maybe that's the explanation for your not mentioning the troops at the Republican Convention. I bet if one of your boys was there, you would have remembered.
Also, how about the tens of millions of Americans, like my Mother, who live on Social Security and Medicare. My Mom, and so many of her family and friends, pay no federal income taxes because their income is at or below the poverty line ($1,100 a month). They (or their spouse) worked their whole lives to have a meager Social Security benefit. Of course, she's also the widow of a WWII Veteran, so what the heck, let her find a job at 84 years old and with osteoporosis. After all, in the world according to Mitt, she's just a freeloader, too.
Kids in college on student loans, disabled Americans who need special care. Holy shit, I could go on and on.
Now, since I really am interested in the politics of all of this, could you tell me how this helps you in Florida, with the highest senior population in the United States, or Ohio, which is second or third. How about the veterans in Virginia, which has the highest veteran population in the country?
Since I know you are good at math, after all, you compiled a fortune, could you tell me how you get to 270 electoral votes by losing just one or two of these states (by the way, you're behind in all 3, before your brilliant statement went public)?
I just thought I'd ask, Mitt, because I'd like to know, because, as I've said, I'm just not as smart as you.
-
We are fucking broke moron.
-
We are fucking broke moron.
Seems like that simple fact never seems to be acknowledged.
-
We are fucking broke moron.
good point, i mean that is clearly a good plan and strategy into economic recovery.
why don't you fags block the debt ceiling and get downgraded some more?
like clinton stated, liberal policies have created more jobs, fact.
-
good point, i mean that is clearly a good plan and strategy into economic recovery.
why don't you fags block the debt ceiling and get downgraded some more?
like clinton stated, liberal policies have created more jobs, fact.
Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling in 2006 remember?
-
good point, i mean that is clearly a good plan and strategy into economic recovery.
why don't you fags block the debt ceiling and get downgraded some more?
like clinton stated, liberal policies have created more jobs, fact.
Really? Where did they create more jobs? In the government to administer another entitlement? And Bill Clinton needs to STFU, he acts like he was some great POTUS, when the fact is he was forced into prosperity.
-
Really? Where did they create more jobs? In the government to administer another entitlement? And Bill Clinton needs to STFU, he acts like he was some great POTUS, when the fact is he was forced into prosperity.
no, in fact they created much more jobs. He was a great POTUS, he had your country going in a great direction, bushed raped it.
you will always be in denial if you are on a team, why don't you look at each policy and action seperately, not republican or liberal, but on it's own merit. That way your absurd bias will be kept in check and real decisions can be made.
-
no, in fact they created much more jobs. He was a great POTUS, he had your country going in a great direction, bushed raped it.
you will always be in denial if you are on a team, why don't you look at each policy and action seperately, not republican or liberal, but on it's own merit. That way your absurd bias will be kept in check and real decisions can be made.
You act as if Congress played no part in anything moron. The fact is that when Clinton lost the congress in 1994 in a landslide he had to go along w the GOP and balance the books and cut welfare and cap gains tax.
-
no, in fact they created much more jobs. He was a great POTUS, he had your country going in a great direction, bushed raped it.
you will always be in denial if you are on a team, why don't you look at each policy and action seperately, not republican or liberal, but on it's own merit. That way your absurd bias will be kept in check and real decisions can be made.
I'm not on any team, but you keep up the old left wing BS of trying to label everyone. Clinton was not a great POTUS, the only reason the country was going in the "right" direction is because congress actually did their fucking job.
-
I'm not on any team, but you keep up the old left wing BS of trying to label everyone. Clinton was not a great POTUS, the only reason the country was going in the "right" direction is because congress actually did their fucking job.
sure, keep telling yourself that. whatever, team win you can get.
-
sure, keep telling yourself that. whatever, team win you can get.
Typical left winger, when all else fails label ::)
-
sure, keep telling yourself that. whatever, team win you can get.
Who the hell are you, nitwit? The GOP congress had nothing to do with the improvement in the economy during the Clinton years? History shows they did. Remove Obama's nuts from your mouth, dingbat.
-
Who the hell are you, nitwit? The GOP congress had nothing to do with the improvement in the economy during the Clinton years? History shows they did. Remove Obama's nuts from your mouth, dingbat.
They worship at the Altar of obama
-
Typical left winger, when all else fails label ::)
lol Im not a liberal, you clearly are a teamster.
-
Typical left winger, when all else fails label ::)
LOL try looking at your post 2 up.
-
You act as if Congress played no part in anything moron. The fact is that when Clinton lost the congress in 1994 in a landslide he had to go along w the GOP and balance the books and cut welfare and cap gains tax.
Repub has been in control of congress since 2010 does that mean they own the current economy?
-
Repub has been in control of congress since 2010 does that mean they own the current economy?
Read Bob Woodwards' book - Obama is no Clinton.
Obama is a destroyer, a liar, a fraud, a snake, and a thief.
-
Repub has been in control of congress since 2010 does that mean they own the current economy?
If they voted for the crap that has led to this point, then the answer is yes
-
Read Bob Woodwards' book - Obama is no Clinton.
Obama is a destroyer, a liar, a fraud, a snake, and a thief.
Why are you blaming Obama for the state of the country when its the GOP who controls congress?
Shouldnt you blame them?
-
Why are you blaming Obama for the state of the country when its the GOP who controls congress?
Shouldnt you blame them?
The whole government is to blame, the POTUS is the CEO, the spokesman for the government. So just like any other CEO he is the focal point
-
good point, i mean that is clearly a good plan and strategy into economic recovery.
why don't you fags block the debt ceiling and get downgraded some more?
like clinton stated, liberal policies have created more jobs, fact.
FACT: Clinton had a GOP-run Congress for three-quarters of his tenure.
-
As usual, Blacken is going into ultra kneepadder mode, sprouting thread after thread, about the latest lefty flavor-of-the-month, Romney-is-doomed spiel.
-
FACT: Clinton had a GOP-run Congress for three-quarters of his tenure.
So why not vote for Obama as POTUS and make sure the Republicans win congress... Sounds like that's the best scenario.
Every time we put one party in charge of 2/3rds... Bush before 2006... Obama since 2008... Shit goes sideways.
-
So why not vote for Obama as POTUS and make sure the Republicans win congress... Sounds like that's the best scenario.
Every time we put one party in charge of 2/3rds... Bush before 2006... Obama since 2008... Shit goes sideways.
Because Obama is not Clinton - check out Bob Woodwards' book.
-
Why are you blaming Obama for the state of the country when its the GOP who controls congress?
Shouldnt you blame them?
The GOP runs ONE HOUSE of Congress; guess who runs the other.
-
So why not vote for Obama as POTUS and make sure the Republicans win congress... Sounds like that's the best scenario.
Every time we put one party in charge of 2/3rds... Bush before 2006... Obama since 2008... Shit goes sideways.
The sideways part happened the last two years of Bush's terms, when the Dems took over Congress.
Besides, we need the whole kit and kaboddle to get rid of ObamaCare.
-
The sideways part happened the last two years of Bush's terms, when the Dems took over Congress.
Besides, we need the whole kit and kaboddle to get rid of ObamaCare.
correct- look when everything went to shit - 2006-2008 when RATlosi and Reid took over.
-
correct- look when everything went to shit - 2006-2008 when RATlosi and Reid took over.
Thank god there was a dem congress during that scumbag Reagan huh ;)
-
Thank god there was a dem congress during that scumbag Reagan huh ;)
And if you look at the position of Dems then they are vastly different than they are now. Also ever heard the term Reagan democrat?
-
And if you look at the position of Dems then they are vastly different than they are now. Also ever heard the term Reagan democrat?
Fuck man... The position of the Republicans was vastly different then... It's all shit and unless you are willing to vote out every incumbent, (Which I sure as hell would by the way) you're never going to change anything.
-
Fuck man... The position of the Republicans was vastly different then... It's all shit and unless you are willing to vote out every incumbent, (Which I sure as hell would by the way) you're never going to change anything.
Exactly
-
found this thought it was about right
you are telling me that 47% (or 48% or 49%) of American households are dependent on the government because they pay no federal income taxes, therefore they consider themselves victims and are expecting housing, health care and whatever, at the government's expense. Also, you're not going to "worry about those people".
47% is quite a number, Mitt. Something like 160,000,000 or so.
That would mean a lot of people. Let's see, as I said, I'm not as smart as you, but that would mean all our wounded warriors who have come home with war related disabilities from WWII, Korea, Viet Nam, Iraq and Afghanistan. You remember those wars, your father supported WWII, but didn't fight it. You supported Viet Nam, but didn't fight it. You supported Iraq and Afghanistan, but none of your 5 boys fought there. So now that those who did fight for our country need our help either transitioning to a normal setting, or permanent help, due to a severe wound, you consider them free-loaders because they are part of the 47% that pay no federal income taxes. As I said, I'm not as smart as you, but maybe that's the explanation for your not mentioning the troops at the Republican Convention. I bet if one of your boys was there, you would have remembered.
Also, how about the tens of millions of Americans, like my Mother, who live on Social Security and Medicare. My Mom, and so many of her family and friends, pay no federal income taxes because their income is at or below the poverty line ($1,100 a month). They (or their spouse) worked their whole lives to have a meager Social Security benefit. Of course, she's also the widow of a WWII Veteran, so what the heck, let her find a job at 84 years old and with osteoporosis. After all, in the world according to Mitt, she's just a freeloader, too.
Kids in college on student loans, disabled Americans who need special care. Holy shit, I could go on and on.
Now, since I really am interested in the politics of all of this, could you tell me how this helps you in Florida, with the highest senior population in the United States, or Ohio, which is second or third. How about the veterans in Virginia, which has the highest veteran population in the country?
Since I know you are good at math, after all, you compiled a fortune, could you tell me how you get to 270 electoral votes by losing just one or two of these states (by the way, you're behind in all 3, before your brilliant statement went public)?
I just thought I'd ask, Mitt, because I'd like to know, because, as I've said, I'm just not as smart as you.
-
-
how many threads are you going to post this in? are you ill in some way? mentally retarded perhaps?
-
how many threads are you going to post this in? are you ill in some way? mentally retarded perhaps?
:D :D :D
-
how many threads are you going to post this in? are you ill in some way? mentally retarded perhaps?
Lawyers (Read unemployed bum) have a lot of spare time on their hand
-
Lawyers (Read unemployed bum) have a lot of spare time on their hand
he is not a lawyer, I would bet money on it, he simply argues to much bullshit and ignores facts to often.