Ladies and Gentlemen: the next President will be

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 8:49 pm

Jimmy Medalions wrote:
BSmack wrote:The question is simply "Who pays the most taxes"?
Precisely, dumbfuck. The answer is simply "the wealthy".

That depends on how you define "most". If you are using raw dollar numbers, then your case might hold water. Though you still have yet to account for the impact of forms of taxation other than Federal Income Tax.

However, those of us with a clue understand that is you take a dollar from a man with 2 dollars to his name, you have hurt him infinitely more than if you take 1000 dollars from a man with 10,000 dollars to his name. Which is why smart people laugh at your dittotards when you try to use raw income tax data to claim the rich pay more.

Jimmy Medalions · Post by **Jimmy Medalions** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 8:54 pm

BSmack wrote:If you are using raw dollar numbers, then your case might hold water.

Might?

Your ass has been so thoroughly kicked you don't even realize it.

Though you still have yet to account for the impact of forms of taxation other than Federal Income Tax.

Which was never part of the discussion, dipshit. Way to 'bring in the reinforcements' since your take sucked balls.

However, those of us with a clue understand that is you take a dollar from a man with 2 dollars to his name, you have hurt him infinitely more than if you take 1000 dollars from a man with 10,000 dollars to his name. Which is why smart people laugh at your dittotards when you try to use raw income tax data to claim the rich pay more.

What a pussy position to take toward the end of a beatdown. Poor widdle poor guy, rich guy hurt him and got over. :cry:

Memo to dumbfuck: rich guy's taxes go to fund poor guy's social programs, none of which the rich guy benefits from.

But let's not cloud the issue. You've been backpedaling since the first take and if you intend to 'win' this debate by having the last post, have at it. You couldn't stay on topic because you were destined to get your ass kicked.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 9:23 pm

Jimmy Medalions wrote:Which was never part of the discussion, dipshit. Way to 'bring in the reinforcements' since your take sucked balls.

The question was "Who pays the most TAXES?", not "who pays the most Federal Income Tax?"

You stepped up with the income tax data to back mv's claim. I never told you to plunger yourself like that.

What a pussy position to take toward the end of a beatdown. Poor widdle poor guy, rich guy hurt him and got over. :cry:

Memo to dumbfuck: rich guy's taxes go to fund poor guy's social programs, none of which the rich guy benefits from.

Bullshit it doesn't benefit rich guys. Who the fuck do you think owns the stores poor people shop at with that benefit money? Welfare and Social Security are as much a safety net for the rich (guaranteeing a certain amount of economic activity and stability) as they are for the poor.

But let's not cloud the issue. You've been backpedaling since the first take and if you intend to 'win' this debate by having the last post, have at it. You couldn't stay on topic because you were destined to get your ass kicked.

I'm right on point here bro. Not my fault you're spinning like a fucking atom smasher trying to show that the most privileged in our country are somehow getting fucked.

Jimmy Medalions · Post by **Jimmy Medalions** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 9:43 pm

Keep it up dipshit. Someone probably thinks you're doing a great job here *

* doubtful

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 12:13 am

Jimmy Medalions wrote:Keep it up dipshit. Someone probably thinks you're doing a great job here *

* doubtful

Going to the "nobody likes you" card already?

I guess it beats having to defend your "takes".

Diego in Seattle · Post by **Diego in Seattle** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 1:06 am

Jimmy Medalions wrote: Memo to dumbfuck: rich guy's taxes go to fund poor guy's social programs, none of which the rich guy benefits from.

SilverSpoon;
If you think that the Walton family doesn't benefit from social programs.....try mixing in a newspaper.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 1:53 am

poptart wrote: The border problem will be THE issue, Wagon.

No, it won't.

Any candidate who tries to run on an immigration platform will be promptly buried by the issues that really matter.

"tart, did you just tell me to "locate my brain"?

How abouts you locate your own fucking country, on a map and then in person, before ever preaching to me about locating a damn thing.

Got it?

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 1:55 am

Uncle Fester wrote:Keep in mind that I live in a state where a pro wrassler rode the populist wave all the way to the governor's office.

Keep in mind that TR still says you're a dumbfuck. If all a popular former president (who ended up outpolling the incumbent in the only poll that mattered) can't do anything better than spliting the vote and insuring the election of the most extreme of the actual candidates (Ross Perot comes to mind again) then we will never see a third party winner. The only hope is for the destruction of one of the present parties.

Wolfman · Post by **Wolfman** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 2:52 am

and some guy named JEB as VP

I'll be back on election eve to collect my prize

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 4:12 am

I like South Korea, Wagon.

And the border is locked tight as a nun's cunt.

Yes, nice place here.

Might even say it's 'the bomb'.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 7:20 am

Diogenes wrote:
Uncle Fester wrote:Keep in mind that I live in a state where a pro wrassler rode the populist wave all the way to the governor's office.
Keep in mind that TR still says you're a dumbfuck. If all a popular former president (who ended up outpolling the incumbent in the only poll that mattered) can't do anything better than spliting the vote and insuring the election of the most extreme of the actual candidates (Ross Perot comes to mind again) then we will never see a third party winner. The only hope is for the destruction of one of the present parties.

One of the current parties?

I suspect it will be both.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 12:44 pm

Not likely.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 12:47 pm

Wolfman wrote:

and some guy named JEB as VP

I'll be back on election eve to collect my prize

You've got a size 11 boot up your ass waiting for you.

Mississippi Neck · Post by **Mississippi Neck** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 2:59 pm

Jimmy Medalions wrote:
Memo to dumbfuck: rich guy's taxes go to fund poor guy's social programs, none of which the rich guy benefits from.
.

Not true. There a many ways a rich guy benefits from social programs. Hey, if nothing else it keeps "poor guy" from stealing "rich guy's" Porsche. :wink:

Not to mention rich guys' taxes help fund a war fought by "poor guy".

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:19 pm

Wolfman wrote:

and some guy named JEB as VP

I'll be back on election eve to collect my prize

Hopefully it will be a handful of functioning braincells.

OCmike · Post by **OCmike** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 7:06 pm

War Wagon wrote:
poptart wrote: The border problem will be THE issue, Wagon.
No, it won't.

Any candidate who tries to run on an immigration platform will be promptly buried by the issues that really matter.

"tart, did you just tell me to "locate my brain"?

How abouts you locate your own fucking country, on a map and then in person, before ever preaching to me about locating a damn thing.

Got it?

I'm assuming you don't get it because you don't live in a border state, Wags, but this issue will be King among domestic issues in '08. Or do you really think that many people give a fuck about flag-burning and gay marriage?

Bottom line: A candidate who gives a timetable by which they will have a border fence completed along with a plan for a 5-fold increase in border agents would slaughter any of the standard hem-n-hawers that Washington usually spits out around election time.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 10:28 pm

Mike

I'm pretty sure that Iraq, terrorism, crises in the Middle East, Korea, or whatever new hotspot flares up in the next two years will be issue #1, not the tempest in a teapot that the immigration issue has recently become.

That, and the current state of the economy. The price of Oil, etc.

Americans (who actually vote) look to their security first and their pocketbook second.

I simply can't see any scenario whatsover where illegal immigration will be the over riding issue of the next election.

If it is, then we've got some seriously fucked up priorities. Don't get me wrong, I can understand the aggravation you border staters must have to deal with putting up with illegals and the problems they pose, but these states won't be deciding the election, anyways. Cali is still going to the Dems, Texas to the Reps, and who gives a fuck about AZ and NM and their pittance of electoral votes?

It's the big "swing" States that control this next election. FL, OH, MI.....win two of these three and you're in. Win all 3, and it's a landslide.

I will amend my prediction of Jebediah seeking the VP gig in 2008, though. Saw some blurb today where he's lost like 41% of his net worth since becoming governator, and simply can't afford further public service at this time.

Look for him to re-enter the political fray around 2012 to 2016.

Without Jeb to help carry Florida in 2008, it'll be an uphill battle for the GOP trying to hold the WH.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 1:26 am

War Wagon wrote:Americans (who actually vote) look to their security first and their pocketbook second.

Most people understand that rampant illegal immigration affects both national security AND their pocketbook.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 1:39 am

BSmack wrote:
War Wagon wrote:Americans (who actually vote) look to their security first and their pocketbook second.
Most people understand that rampant illegal immigration affects both national security AND their pocketbook.

Not to the degree you'd like to spin it.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Tue Jul 18, 2006 1:43 am

War Wagon wrote: Americans (who actually vote) look to their security first and their Constitutional rights never.

FTFY

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 3:12 am

Martyred wrote:
War Wagon wrote: Americans (who actually vote) look to their security first and their Constitutional rights never.

FTFY

Leave Abe Lincoln out of this.

OCmike · Post by **OCmike** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:33 pm

War Wagon wrote:Mike

I'm pretty sure that Iraq, terrorism, crises in the Middle East, Korea, or whatever new hotspot flares up in the next two years will be issue #1, not the tempest in a teapot that the immigration issue has recently become.

That, and the current state of the economy. The price of Oil, etc.

Iraq won't be king issue...we already know everyone's position on it. Ditto terrorism, ditto North Korea. We can't do shit about the price of oil other than a windfall tax, which will never happen, so that's a non-issue.

The big issue(s) will be budgetary spending and, right in line with that (largely because of the cost), illegal immigration.

Americans (who actually vote) look to their security first and their pocketbook second.

If you've lived in an area with large numbers of illegals, you'd know that the crime rates in those regions is off the chart, nevermind the possibility of Al Quaida coming across the southern border.

I simply can't see any scenario whatsover where illegal immigration will be the over riding issue of the next election.

That's because you don't see the big picture.

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:40 pm

War Wagon wrote:
BSmack wrote:
War Wagon wrote:Americans (who actually vote) look to their security first and their pocketbook second.
Most people understand that rampant illegal immigration affects both national security AND their pocketbook.
Not to the degree you'd like to spin it.

hmmmm, 87% of the American people say you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.......

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:42 pm

War Wagon wrote: Americans (who actually vote) look to their security first and their pocketbook second.

You live in Missouri.
You live in western Missouri.
If you are worried about terrorism hitting you, there is something 100% retarded going on.

If anyone in this state votes "security" then they are retarded.

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:42 pm

Felix wrote:
War Wagon wrote:
BSmack wrote: Most people understand that rampant illegal immigration affects both national security AND their pocketbook.
Not to the degree you'd like to spin it.
hmmmm, 87% of the American people say you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.......

87%? That seems a bit low.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:45 pm

Diogenes wrote:
Martyred wrote:
War Wagon wrote: Americans (who actually vote) look to their security first and their Constitutional rights never.

FTFY
Leave Abe Lincoln out of this.

I'll see your Abe Lincoln and raise you an FDR.

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:47 pm

Goober McTuber wrote:
Felix wrote:
War Wagon wrote: Not to the degree you'd like to spin it.
hmmmm, 87% of the American people say you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.......
87%? That seems a bit low.

I agree, but that's what the most recent Harris poll indicates........

I'd bet it's probably higher now........

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 8:00 pm

Felix wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:
Felix wrote: hmmmm, 87% of the American people say you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.......
87%? That seems a bit low.
I agree, but that's what the most recent Harris poll indicates........

I'd bet it's probably higher now........

Harris did a poll to determine the percentage of Americans who believe War Wagon to be a clueless fuckwit? Cool.

Terry in Crapchester · Tue Jul 18, 2006 8:22 pm

OCmike wrote:If you've lived in an area with large numbers of illegals, you'd know that the crime rates in those regions is off the chart, nevermind the possibility of Al Quaida coming across the southern border.

Truth be told, there's a greater chance of Al Qaeda coming across the northern border than the southern:

Canada has more liberal immigration laws than does Mexico.
Unlike in Mexico, there is a relatively thriving Islamic population in Canada, at least in the larger cities, which lessens the chance that they would attract unwanted attention in Canada.
The northern border is, if anything, far more porous than is the southern border, and the various waterways along the northern border increase the number of potential entry points into the U.S. exponentially.
Al Qaeda is not stupid. They probably follow this issue closely enough to realize which border is getting the most political attention, and they'll sneak in from the opposite direction.

OCmike · Post by **OCmike** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 8:32 pm

All good points, including the fact that it's highly preferable to cross over into Minnesota in July-August than it is in Arizona.

However, I imagine that it'd still be easier for someone with the name Mohammed Al-Ackbar to sneak into Mexico than to sneak into Canada (and then the US).

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Tue Jul 18, 2006 8:50 pm

Goober McTuber wrote: Harris did a poll to determine the percentage of Americans who believe War Wagon to be a clueless fuckwit? Cool.

Terry in Crapchester · Sun Jul 23, 2006 4:26 pm

Ladies and Gentlemen: the next President will be . . .

Hopefully, at a minimum, somebody who knows how to chew a pretzel and how to pronounce the word "nuclear."

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:00 pm

mvscal wrote:So how did you like getting the everloving fuck stomped out of you by an idiot who can't chew a pretzel or pronounce nuclear?

I am absolutely certain that Rove can do both.

Cuda · Post by **Cuda** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:16 pm

perfect timeing, mvscal.

Lurch is now claiming none of the shit that's going on would be going on if he were president- by which he can only mean that it would be going on, but it wouldn't be a problem, because he'd be president

Mister Bushice · Post by **Mister Bushice** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:25 pm

Bush shared his

"Hezbollah has got to stop this shit"

Awesome.diplomatic.effort.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:27 pm

mvscal wrote:Of course it never crossed your mind that it was due to the fact that your candidates were even more idiotic than a pretzel choking dimwit who can't pronounce nuclear.

This is why you keep losing.

Abe Lincoln would have lost in this day and age. The results of our most recent elections speak as much about the voters as those who were voted upon.

Cuda · Post by **Cuda** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:30 pm

Mister Bushice wrote:Bush shared his

"Hezbollah has got to stop this shit"
Awesome.diplomatic.effort.

not exactly the same level as reagan calling the soviet union "the evil empire", but had the same æffect on the left: it gave them a grand-mal seizure

Tom In VA · Post by **Tom In VA** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:31 pm

Mister Bushice wrote:Bush shared his

"Hezbollah has got to stop this shit"
Awesome.diplomatic.effort.

Oh Christ, just rack him for his candor.

Mister Bushice · Post by **Mister Bushice** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:34 pm

it ain't the candor I'm thinking of. It's the fact that having them "stop this shit" is in all liklihood his best effort at coming up with a solution.

Cuda · Post by **Cuda** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:38 pm

looks like Babshice's neighbors have come up with a solution of their own...