The Establishments war on Donald Trump
See other The Establishments war on Donald Trump Articles
Title: Club for Growth Action to Trump: You Sue Us, We'll Sue You Back
Source:
National Review
URL Source: http://www.nationalreview.com/corne ... well-sue-you-back-jim-geraghty
Published: Sep 26, 2015
Author: Jim Geraghty
Post Date: 2015-09-26 08:54:45 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 16104
Comments: 92
Attorneys for Club for Growth Action, a political arm of the Club for Growth, sent a letter to the Trump Organization’s General Counsel Thursday threatening a counter-suit if Trump sues their organization. “If Mr. Trump brought suit on the baseless grounds stated in your letter, Club Action would not hesitate to seek sanctions for abusive litigation under Federal Rule 11 or equivalent rules and, depending upon the forum, under statutes that deter Strategic Litigation against Public Participation (anti-SLAPP statutes),” the letter states. “Stripped of its purple adjectives, your letter makes two complaints against Club Action. Both complaints are untrue, and neither comes close to the type of knowing and malicious falsehood the First Amendment requires a public figure such as Mr. Trump to establish.” At the heart of the issue is the Club for Growth Action ad stating that Trump “supports higher taxes.” Trump’s lawyers say he no longer holds the position the ad refers to, and will soon be unveiling a plan to lower taxes. (Trump has said, however, he intends to target the “hedge fund guys” who he feels aren’t paying their fair share.) Perhaps the more interesting contention from the Club is this: You accuse the Club for Growth of trying to “extort” a million dollars from Mr. Trump in return for its political support. Nonsense. Club Action reports it was Mr. Trump who, last spring, asked to meet with the Club. During the meeting requestsed by Mr. Trump, as reflected in the attached letter to Mr. Trump, the Club’s Mr. [David] McIntosh made clear that the Club and Mr. Trump had important areas of policy disagreement. However, some areas of policy agreement also were identified. Mr. Trump asked how he could support the Club and, upon being informed that a donation would be appreciated, invited Mr. McIntosh to send a follow-up letter through Mr. Lewandowski, who also attended.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-40) not displayed.
.
.
.
#41. To: Rufus T Firefly (#40)
I am not interested in "getting rid of the rich". There will always be rich and poor, because men have different talents. I am interested in rooting out every law that is favorable to the rich, every tax loophole, to make them pay the same rates, with only the same deductions, as everybody else. That the middle class wealth, in houses, is taxed every year, but upper class wealth, in securities, is not, is why the middle class cannot accumulated wealth, while the already-rich do quite easiily. The middle class have 30% of their gain in wealth taken in taxes. The rich have very little taken, only the liquid portion they take as wages. It's systematic robbery, with the rich having the benefit of government, but having corruptly shifted the burden of paying for the government, and bleeding for it, over to the middle class and poor. And the accumulation of wealth in fewer and fewer hands has become so rapid, and so brazen, that the ability to maintain the political fist to do it is diminishing. Trump gets it. He's a rich guy who understands the need to tax the rich more and to take away their loopholes. Middle class people do not get it, because they don't understand how rigged the system is (because they are not exposed to it). They merely feel the effects of being beggared, without understanding why it is happening. It's why only a Trump can actually lead such a reform. But the party of the rich - the Republicans - well and truly hate him, because he's going to break their rice bowl. He's certainly not going to take all they have, nor do I advocate that. He's going to take what needs to be taken to make the system fairer, to adjust it, to make it viable. The other alternative is the Democrats. They will nationalize a lot more wealth, and be more socialistic in their approach, though this will be masked by taking the wealth and markets of SOME rich and handing it over to OTHER rich, who are their cronies. The Democrat approach will harness up the grievances of the poor and whip it up, but instead of aiming for fairness and reason, like a Trump would, they will whip people into a fury on racial lines, and get a mob that will let them do more than is fair or prudent. You seem to be resisting doing what is fair and prudent. The endpojnt of what you think you advocate will be a revolution that will kill the rich. I don't like revolutions. They are destructive. People must be reasonable,. Part of being reasonable with food is to eat enough to be satisfied, then stop. And if that amount makes you fat, eat as much as you NEED, then stop. Being reasonable with money means accumulating enough to be well off, comfortable and control your enterprise. Then stop. If you're so greedy for more that you're putting your own countrymen out of work by the millions, and seeking to take away their retirement benefits and leave them without health care, you are fitting your own neck for a noose. That's stupid. Trump is the sort of guy who can walk the right path. He's talking about these things. The Democrats will be more brutal and less fair, but will avoid a revolution. Let the Republicans continue on their path, and things will end in fire and blood in our lifetimes. We don't need to repeat history, if we're smart. If we refuse to be smart, well, the Red side wins almost all of the Revolutions, in the end. Because demographics is destiny. The best answer is to reasonably redistribute wealth on an ongoing basis, so that it never comes to that.
No. The Democrats gave them what they want, and got their permanent support. That's not sending them checks. It's giving them the legislation they want. That's the whole POINT of a lobby: to get the legislation you want. Maybe we can just say that Democrats understand government better than Republicans do.
The top 2 percent pay what percent?
Or we could just say you understand democrats better because they relate to your values better.
You people always ignore the other taxes the bottom 50%: social security, medicare, sales - on every penny. They all pay. You always limit your analysis to the income tax. But your numbers are dwindling. The Republicans have decimated the middle class so badly, that there are fewer and fewer people willing to buy your sort of bullshit half truths anymore. Trump gets it. That's why HE is ready to hit the financial class with taxes that are fair. But folks like you - you'll never get it. AND you'll block Trump. And so this time you'll get Biden or Hillary, and a Democrat Supreme Court, and then instead of the reasonable and fair sort of tax distribution that people like I am talking about - BECAUSE YOU PEOPLE will not be honest about taxes, you're going to GET Democrats, who are not honest about taxes either - and THEY will rape you in a way that people who are fair, like me, and Trump, never ever would. You lie about taxes by telling half truths. Income taxes are only about a third of all revenues. The other two thirds of revenues come from taxes that hit everybody, and the bottom 75% pay most of those, because they hit the rich little. The age of special treatment of the rich, places to hide THEIR money from taxes, are going the way of the Dodo bird. The only question is whether they will be taxed EQUITABLY, which I advocate, or whether they will be taxed by socialist revolutionaries and raped, which is what your enemies advocate. You've gotten YOUR way since Reagan. It doesn't work, and the middle class and working class have been so hollowed out that the numbers no longer exist to sustain your power. You will have to give up some of your excessive gains, some of the things that grossly and unfairly favor the rich. The country is not going to tolerate the unfairness any more, and nobody is going to listen to the lies you guys tell any more either. The rich pay 70% of 40% of the taxes. Big dead. Everybody else pays the biggest portion of 60% of the taxes. Nobody cares if you "fact check" me and "prove" that it's "only 37%". You do not have the votes. You cannot keep power. You cannot sustain the lie. You are going to be defeated. The question is: how bad. You go along with Trump, and me, and you will simply be treated FAIRLY - you''ll pay more taxes, because you deserve to. You will lose the special exemptions, but you precious rich will still be top dogs. But if you are stupid - and believe me, you Republicans ARE very stupid - as stupid as the French nobility were, or the Russian, or the rich landlords of pre-Revolutionary Mexico - you will try to brazen out your lies, to sustain your position, even though you no longer have the votes. So you'll defeat the moderates like Trump and me, and you'll get your plutocrat- lovers. And then you will have Hillary and the Democrats, who really DO hate you (I don't, Trump doesn't), and THEY will be a lot worse than simply make you play fair. THEY lie like you guys do, but in the other direction. So instead of getting to "fair", which is all I want, they'll get to "raping you", which is what they want. I'm not interested in trying to go through a full exposition of the tax code to you Republicans anymore. You don't CARE, you never did. You're hellbent on preserving your lies. But your's done. You're finished. It's like the slavery party in 1865, with the South defeated, trying to argue with Lincoln for the protection of property (slavery) blah, blah. They were finished. They were not going to sustain that anymore. They lost. The only question was whether they would lose their LIVES. Here., the question is whether your precious rich will pay their fair share (the REAL fair share, not the Republican lies about fairness, which always manipulate the truth), or be raped of assets. If the Democrats win, your rich get raped. If Trump wins, they get to join the ranks of regular taxpayers, and pay over a third of their increase in wealth every year. There is no scenario by which they hold their advantages. The jig is up. All that I am saying is that there are not too many fair-minded people like Trump and me. And that at a certain point the abuse of the fairminded becomes too much. If you force us to choose between Hitler (you) and Stalin (the socialistic Dems), we will choose Stalin. In 1936 America had that choice: Hitler, Stalin..,or FDR. FDR was a very wise choice. That's the choice you have now. We can return to our American roots and have a reasonable solution that clips the wings of your precious rich but does not destroy them, or you can go for Hitler and get hanged by Stalin. Hitler never wins under any scenario. Never has. Never will. There are not enough rich to actually hold the line. You need more men, and there aren't any more. FDR is extending you an olive branch. He comes in the guise of Trump. Better take that Olive branch, because Stalin is standing in the wings, and he's not going to be kind.
Which will fail, because voting is by machine, and the local political parties control the machine counts. "It doesn't matter how many people vote, only who counts them." - Stalin
I think you missed the EITC. Some who do not pay get an "Earned Income Tax Credit" as a socialistic bonus.
You have quite a few posting here that despise the "rich". Filthy smelly Occupy Movement sympathizers. A drug loving hippie trait.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Yes, some do. And I think you make have missed in my commentary that I referred to the band of people between the cutoff of the EITC and the Social Security cap. THOSE are the people who own cars and houses and who are exposed to the full ravage of the tax code, without having the sort of assets that get the special upper class exceptions. They're also the bulk of the American population. The upper class should LOSE al of their exceptions so that they are taxed exactly the SAME as these people, on all of their income and property - just like the bulk of Americans are. That's how you make it fair: stop pretending that "houses" - which are property bought with after-tax income - are different from securities. The difference is that houses are taxed at 1.4% of their full value, annually, and often have transfer taxes, but securities are only taxed on the capital gain at their sale, and don't pay transfer taxes. HUGE difference, which means that the very rich only pay taxes on most of their assets WHEN THEY CHOOSE, which is never. Because of the other tricks available to those with vast wealth, that the tax code has been designed to accomodate. Republicans, if they were honest, OUGHT to be really interested in knowing these things. BUT THEY'RE NOT. Instead, they grouse in ignorance about things they don't know, and support a tax code that has massively shifted the concentration of national wealth into fewer and fewer hands, in 40 short years. The incuriosity of Republicans about this, and the way that they go on and on about "deserving" it - that wealth concentration wasn't the result of hard work, it was the result of a grossly unfair tax code - is why I call Republicans liars. Because they are. But the jig really is up. Who have the Republicans got left? Well, there's about half of the super-rich. The other half side with Democrats, in part because they expect that when Democrats take plenary power, they'll use the government to put their rivals out of business and take their market share. And there's an ever-dwindling "striver class" that dreams of being super rich one day, but that has no practical means of getting there BECAUSE the game is rigged so severely against them. There USED TO BE national security types, but the Republicans sold them out and didn't treat them in the VA. Fewer and fewer veterans support the party of W Bush. There were the pro-life Christians, but the GOP sold them out with Harriet Miers, the Schiavo fiasco, Mitt Romney, John Roberts, and the current Planned Parenthood funding. The number of pro-life Christians who are gung-ho for the GOP has shrunk by millions now. There were the Border-bots, but the GOP is open-borders now. Only Trump is for building the wall, and he is vilified. Who's left, then? Not enough. The Republicans are now, at best, 28% of the electorate. They are aging and dwindling. The Congress, for now, is GOP, because people wanted Obamacare stopped. But the Republicans funded it and guaranteed its survival - and the Republican Supreme Court has twice saved it constitutionally, so it's here to say. WHY? Because the very rich make a lot of money on forced health insurance - THEY are the shareholders and CEOs of the iinsurance companies! It's a rigged casino, and the Republicans are visibly seen to have rigged it, and to be keeping it rigged. Their electoral base is collapsing. They are finished. They have to change. Trump is the voice of change, because he's rich, and has exploited all aspects of the system, but he thinks it's unfair and is looking to change it. The super-rich do not want that change. The question is whether the rank-and-file Republicans, and Trump crossovers, will be enough to get him the nomination, or whether the rich will succeed in shutting him out. With Trump, we'll have an FDR figure who can draw up a "new deal". Without him, the Republicans have nothing like the votes to win with any of their candidates, so it will the Democrat. And the Democrats' policies will look and feel a lot more like a "Five Year Plan".
I don't despise the rich. But I see the hole into which they've led us. We will either be reasonable and unfuck what they have fucked up, OR we will turn into a socialst country. I'm for unfucking it, but the inability of men like you to see the difference between fixing things and being a "filthy smelly Occupy Movement sympathizer" tells me to plan for President Hillary. You cannot win with such a narrow base and such foolish lack of perception.
Yep. The IRS paid out $16 billion in EITC payments in 2013. IN ERROR. The IRS spent $65 billion on the EITC in FY 2014, of which 27.2% or $18 billion were improper. The IRS spent $133 billion IN ERROR the last 10 years. Damn. Just can't seem to get it right.
Do you really want to understand how the tax code works, and favors them? Or are you simply going to favor them NO MATTER WHAT the truth is? If you can be swayed by what you learn, it is worth the exercise. Otherwise, my telling you how things really are, how the tax system actually works to so massively favor them, will not do anything but make you angrier at me than you already are, and what good will that serve? So, you tell me - do you really want to know the truth about the tax code?
The top 10% pays 70% of all federal income taxes and the bottom 50% pay nothing. Yeah, they're massively favored. Favor them any more and they'll have to file for bankruptcy.
I don't consider Deckard a drug loving hippie. Since he is one you were obviously referring to. Deckard in my view is a good guy. He just wants to be left alone to do whatever he wants. Deckard values freedom and we should respect that. I think that he just has a blind spot in what drugs do to society. He thinks the benefits of letting everyone do whatever they want in relation to drugs is more important then the havoc they wreak across society. He has taken a position of "do whatever you want" as long as it doesnt' harm others. Even though it does harm others indirectly. He has taken that position and is trying to be consistent with a belief system he has decided to adopt.
If you can be swayed by what you learn, it is worth the exercise. Otherwise, my telling you how things really are, how the tax system actually works to so massively favor them, will not do anything but make you angrier at me than you already are, and what good will that serve? So, you tell me - do you really want to know the truth about the tax code? First I'm not angry with you, or others. I just tend to go for the throat when you disagree with me. I'm usually right, so that would mean you are wrong if you disagree with me. I suspect you have a similar belief about yourself. So when I say some nasty stuff to you, that is just me letting off some steam so to speak. Nothing personal. I react to comments on threads and not so much the individual. So I may be harsh on one thread and complimentry on another. Hope that clears that up. Now back to the topic at hand. The rich have advantages in the tax code. Sure I agree with that. The poor also have advantages in the tax code. Like paying zero. Or paying zero and still getting money back. I think the rich should pay more. That they should pay a higher percentage. That is negotiable in my mind. But in principal they should pay the most and a higher percentage. Remember in the Bible when a poor lady put in a tiny bit of money and the rich put in a lot. Jesus I believe said that she put in more money then they did because they contributed out of their abundence and she out what she needed to live. So yes I think the rich should pay a higher share then the poor. I don't agree with so called loopholes that allow them to pay nothing. Lets expand this. I don't agree when cities make special tax rules to entice a business to move to thier town. I've hear it said that corporations don't pay any taxes, that they just pass it on in their costs. So maybe we should have no income tax and only tax corporations since they don't pay any taxes anyway.
I certainly respect the ideal. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
The poor pay plenty of taxes. Everybody pays sales taxes, even the homeless when they buy their Mad Dog 20/20. Sales taxes are not trivial either. Leaving aside the very high taxes on alcohol and cigarettes, which are avoidable expenses, clothes are taxed, as is prepared food of whatever sort (such as cafeteria food, or the gas station sandwich). Gasoline, of course, is taxed. So are telecoms. There are a handful of low population states that have no sales tax, but the LOW sales tax states have an average sales tax of 5.5% (when state AND LOCAL sales taxes are counted: a tax is a tax), and the average of the top-5 highest sales tax states (which are mostly Southern), is over 9%. The average overall US sales tax is in the 6.5% range. If weighted by state populations, it would be higher than that. Everybody pays that. Likewise, everybody with a wage of any kind from an employer pays Social Security tax and Medicare tax on the first dollar, and self-employed people pay double. Social Security and Medicare tax combine to 7.65%, and that is paid on the very first dollar earned. Social Security and Medicare tax is not trivial. It is 34% of Federal revenue. And remember, the rich only pay the Social Security tax on the bottom $106,000 or so of their pay and bonuses, but middle and lower class Americans pay that tax on every penny they earn. There is no tax deduction for any of that. So, the poorest of the poor who have a job at all, pay a combined total of about 14.5% of their first dollar in taxes. Because they are so poor, their combined incomes, and the taxes they pay, barely move the needle when it comes to national aggregate taxes collected, but even the poorest of the poor DO pay substantial taxes. And that's assuming they don't smoke or drink. And let's be clear, sales taxes are not a "trivial" portion of government revenues: 34% of state government revenue comes as sales tax, and these taxes fall quite heavily on the poor, proportionately speaking. This is why I get angry when Republicans use that very deceitful argument that the rich pay "70% of the income taxes". Considering that the rich have 85% of the wealth, the fact that they pay 70% of the income taxes indicates that they UNDERPAY by 15%. But let's not lose sight of the ball here. The poor do tend to do both more, out of depression perhaps, and those taxes are sky high. One may grouse that they should not consume these products, and that may be completely true from a health or life perspective, but the fact is that they pay a lot of money in cigarette and booze taxes. "Sin" taxes amount to 3.8% of ALL revenue collected in America, and they skew very heavily to the low end of the socio-economic spectrum. The poor pay taxes. They pay Social Security and Medicare: 7.65%. They pay sales taxes for clothing, shoes, haircuts and prepared foods of whatever type. Some places tax food generally. It is true that very poor people qualify for an Earned Income Tax Credit - they get a certain amount of money back as a credit. But the income threshold is very low. For a single person, the threshold above which he cannot go is $14,820. Now, remember that he is going to spend $1092.42 of that on Social Security and Medicare Tax. leaving him with $13,727.58. And he's going to spend on average somewhere around 6.5% of his income on sales taxes, so lop off another $963,30. So, the guy at the top of that threshold, just sneaking under the wire to get his EITC, spent $2055.72 on taxes. The standard deduction and personal exemption for federal income tax amounts to $10,300, so this guy IS paying the Federal Income Tax, at a rate of 15%, on $4520 of his income. That's another $675. So now, add that to his Social Security and Sales Taxes, and he's paid $2730.72 of his income on taxes. That's about 18,43% of a very small income. What does he have left to live on? $12,089.30, or about $1007.44 per month. Think of the cost of four things: food, bus tickets, rent and washing clothes. Good thing he doesn't smoke. The median gross rent in the United States is $905 per month. Obviosuly he can't do that. The HUD's "Extremely low income" rent calculation - what somebody in a tenement in Hell pays, is about $294,25 per month. This is the average, it skews quite a bit higher in urban areas (where the poor people live) and quite a bit lower in rural areas. Of course, in rural areas, transport is needed. Oh, and the Earned Income Tax Credit this guy earns? $503 per year maximum. He DOES pay income taxes, even to the Feds. Single guys and women are not being paid to live. They pay taxes. Oh, and EITC doesn't kick in until age 25. The bottom end here is threadbare. When children are involved, the benefits are more generous. Essentially, they make sure that the taxes to the parent/guardian are reimbursed by the amount that it costs to house, clothe and feed a child at a basic level. In 2014, about $55.4 billion was paid out in total EITC, of which $12.6 billion was improperly paid, so the real cost of the actual poverty relief program, which offsets the cost of taxes to people with children (the childless do not have their full tax burdens reimbursed) , is $42.8 billion, which is 1.1% of the budget. God lays aside 10% for the poor in his Law (and Jesus demanded a great deal more than that!), so American Christians have nothing to grouse about at the lower end. Single people are paying taxes, even with the Earned Income Tax Credit. Homeless derelicts who live off of begging and sleep in shelters are paying taxes: for booze and cigarettes. In fact, given the very high rates of taxation on those, derelicts may be paying 20- 30% of their total begging income in excise taxes on those products. The only people really not paying taxes are poor people with many children, but that is because the allowances for up to three children, which are basically enough to eat, house and clothe a child, do exceed the total taxes paid, by a married couple filing jointly with 3 or more kids, earning income down in the levels we are talking about. And even they DO pay taxes, they just get something back. What is the alternative? Let the children. Always remember: God's poverty relief tax was 10%. We spend a tenth of that on this tax relief for the poor. Other poverty relief programs: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, etc., spend more than this. But when one considers what a real pittance is spent on poverty relief through the tax code, and one looks at the MASSIVE loopholes for the rich, that allow hundreds of billions of dollars that WOULD be paid by the poor or middle class, were those revenue streams and wealth reservoirs taxed at the top they way they are for everybody downscale, it bothers me when people pretend that poverty relief through tax credits is breaking the budget. It REALLY bothers me when Christians do it. We should know better.
The FED prints $1,5 trillion a year out of thin air and just gives it to the banks at practically zero interest. Federal expenditures are too high, but they're in the $3.77 trillion per year range. So instead have the Treasury print the $1.5 trillion directly and spend it, reducing the amount that needs to be taken in taxes to $1,87 trillion. We currently collect about $3.4 trillion, so give money printing back to the Treasury, end the Federal Reserve, print $1.5 billion directly, and cut taxes by 50% across the board, and you'll stimulate the hell out of the economy, and break the hold of the Fed on America's future. But I dream.
But they pay those menial sales taxes with EBT cards. The poor doesn't pay Jack shit.. and most are happy living like a smelly scumbag in an apartment that smells like cigarettes, kerosene and pit bull... because they trade that lifestyle for having everyday off from work. It takes 3 or 4 hard working people to be taxed from all their pay checks to fund just ONE scumbag family. We are running out of the 3 and 4 workers per scumbag. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
It takes 3 or 4 hard working people to be taxed from all their pay checks to fund just ONE scumbag family. We are running out of the 3 and 4 workers per scumbag. The food stamp benefit is about $130 per month. Nobody is living high on the hog for that. "smelly scumbag..scumbag family...scumbag". Christians are not permitted by their God to think this way. Pagans such as yourself are, of course, permitted to judge and hate whomever you please. For awhile.
I'd rather Hillary do that than Runio or Jeb or Fiorina. IOW, your constant protestations aside, you simply do not give a shit about unlimited abortion. Just as I'd come to expect.
LOL.
I do give a shit, but I have come to expect lying, or amnesiac Republicans like you, to keep on pretending that your party, who gave us Roe, and Casey, and Romneycare, and Obamacare, and that funded Planned Parenthood for all these years and again, is pro-life. That way you can keep pretending that the Democrats are worse. But in fact, the Democrats are JUST THE SAME. You Republicans gave us abortion, wrapped it all up nice by the Supreme Court, imposed it, and kept reimposing it, and made it an obligation of taxpayers with your Mitt Romney. You did it. The Democrats just cheerlead and are happy, because they love it. You pretend to hate it, but you don't. You love it. You IMPOSED it. So, I know that there is no difference at all between the parties, and that whichever wins, we're going to have abortion on demand. I know that Republicans, by lying through their teeth, and Christians, by permitting themselves to be dupes following Republicans because they love other unhealthy aspects of the Republican party too much (the un-Christian obsession with Israel, for example), won't break free of the evil and form a NEW party. Therefore, Christian laziness and blindness prevents any organized opposition to the Republcans to emerge. So we're stuck with two pro-abortion parties. Given that, Democrat economics are much more Christian than Republican greed and corruption. So yes, I prefer Democrats over Republicans. Republicans are pro-abortion, pro-war, miilitarily incompetent lovers of mammon. Democrats are pro-abortion, pro-Israel (except for Obama, which is interesting) believers in providing for the poor. Both are evil babykillers. The Democrats are much more economically moral. Democrats are morally better than Republicans on three fronts: Republicans liars, either baldfaced to others or to themselves - refusing to open their eyes, Republicans are very bloodthirsty, loving war and conflict, and Republicans serve mammon. Democrats tell the truth: they're killers of babies and proud of it (which makes them as disgusting as Republicans, but more honest than Republicans, who pretend they're pro-life but impose abortion at every turn), they are less bloodthirsty, and their belief in poverty relief and is far more Christian. I'm still not voting for babykillers. Which means that I won't vote for Republicans or Democrats. Democrats are more moral people, though. Republicans are morally lost on every vector, and they lie to themselves to boot, which makes them incapable of reforming or, really, effectively accomplishing anything good. You can keep trying to peddle your sad pathetic lie that Republicans are pro-life - maybe you even believe it. Open your eyes, man, Wise up. Stop being a dupe. Roe. Casey. Romneycare abortion. Obamacare, Planned Parenthood. O'Connor. Kennedy. Souter. Roberts. Harriet Myers. Terri Schiavo. Republicans are evil. Don't be evil. Get out of that party and shake the dust off the soles of your feet.
Wait, is that TRUMP in that image with the eagle and the flag? And what's that guitar thing he's got in his hand?
2) Christians are not permitted by their God to think this way. Pagans such as yourself are, of course, permitted to judge and hate whomever you please. For awhile. 1) I never said anyone was "living high on the hog". What I said was millions upon millions of generational shitbag welfare rats have become accustomed to living a smelly rat lifestyle in trade for not working. That's the problem. 2) I'll post a few things that is a little hard for the stomach to accept... it helps me identify the sites weak sympathetic libtards. You've been outed. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
But I dream. The problem with just printing a boatload of money is that is causes inflation and makes my savings and all dollars relatively worthless. If retirement incomes are not adjusted for inflation, the retirement income is rendered inadequate. Technically, the bills are printed by the U.S. Government Bureau of Printing and Engraving. But they sure are Federal Reserve Notes and not the old U.S. Gold or Silver Certificates. I agree it should all be returned to the Department of the Treasury. (Off topic, but while we are at it, I would return the USPS to the Department of the Post Office.) I think the arithmetic is off and printing $1.5T would reduce the needed tax from $3.77T to $2.27T. But if that could really work, why not just print $3.77T and eliminate the tax altogether? Print $18T more and pay off the debt. We'd be debt free and tax free. But at the new rate of inflation, it might cost $100 to buy a happy meal.
Wow. At the cost of a few hundred dollars, Trump gets this article, lots of public debate, $1M of free tv attention provided by The Club for Growth of Karl Rove, and he gets to dominate a few more news cycles while low-energy Jeb! continues to be written about mainly on milk cartons.
Probably a minigun. No mag changes, it's belt fed. Exactly so. The rampant inflation of the Obama era has done more to impoverish the elderly. It's an income-leveling effect. So they hand out more food stamps and EITC payments all around, ultimately making the problem worse.
The Club is a longtime enemy of Rove and the Bushes. The Club often funded the challengers of the Bush-backed GOPe candidates. The most famous example was when the Bush machine backed Arlen Specter against Pat Toomey. Years later, Toomey left his job as prez of the Club and took Specter's Senate seat. It took Toomey five years but he did prevail over Specter, Rove and Bush. During these years, Toomey's bitterness did make the Club far more combative toward GOPe incumbents, especially in knocking them out in primaries. I'd think you would at least have some notion of who they are before you make up such weak nonsense about them. They are pretty well-known.
Toomey is and establishment POS!
You really do just make crap up to suit whatever line of argument you are trying to muster.
Oh dear, Karl Rove has American Crossroads, and the Conservative Victory Project. Correction: The argument stands with no dispute on the merits. However, you are invited to try to make an argument on the merits. This Trump fellow is a genius at getting his opposition to pay to give him airtime. Jeb is as absent as Ferris Bueller at attendance.
Toomey had many betrayals for the establishment. Lets start with his expanded background checks idea.
He's getting a lot of free media attention from libmedia because he is such a trainwreck for the GOP. If he became the GOP nominee, that would end immediately and he'd get no coverage he didn't pay for or outside his actual campaign events. Then he'd have to pull out some of those billions he claims to have. Or sell some of his properties so he can run a competitive campaign against Hitlery (who expects to run a $1.5B campaign). I think Trump loves his money and properties a lot more than he wants to be prez.
Toomey is far from ideal, just like Santorum. But he is infinitely better than Snarlin' Arlen. We're talking about Blue Pennsylvania, not Red Texas. We can't expect everything we'd want in a pol from a state like PA.
Which is why I pointed to what the Fed has been doing, in the last year and before. We don't have inflation now, at $1.5 trillion per year. Which means that the Treasury can print that much instead of the Fed, and the rest needed to pay for the gov't can be collected through taxes.
The contrary. I view abortion - and the fact that the people of this country, both parties, will never abolish it, is the reason America is truly evil. and will eventually be destroyed by God. And I think the inability of Christians to walk out of the Republican Party, or to stand together, stand up, and stand fast, is an indication of the degree to which the cancer of apostasy has sunken into American Christianity. So, I view this as a tragedy. And I view your dogged residual loyally for the Republicans, and your simultaneous illogical hatred for the Democrats (given their similarities), is a sad example of the loss of way of Christians I described. You come at me doggedly about this, and I see your blindness to the moral indefensibility of your own position - and it makes me sad.
Both parties are already major train wrecks so why not double down, that will just help get rid of both of them even sooner... Trumps biggest issue is he doesn't know when to engage/disengage his mouth...
Comments (81 - 92) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#42. To: A K A Stone (#35)
#43. To: misterwhite (#38)
The Democrats bought their vote long ago.
#44. To: Vicomte13 (#42)
I am interested in rooting out every law that is favorable to the rich, every tax loophole, to make them pay the same rates, with only the same deductions, as everybody else.
#45. To: Vicomte13 (#43)
Maybe we can just say that Democrats understand government better than Republicans do.
#46. To: misterwhite (#36)
#47. To: misterwhite (#39)
(Edited)
Then I predict we'll have the biggest write-in campaign in this nation's history.
#48. To: misterwhite, Vicomte13 (#36)
The bottom 50% don't pay shit. They're freeloaders.
#49. To: A K A Stone (#35)
#50. To: nolu chan (#48)
#51. To: GrandIsland (#49)
#52. To: nolu chan (#48)
"Some who do not pay get an "Earned Income Tax Credit" as a socialistic bonus."
#53. To: A K A Stone (#44)
(Edited)
The top 2 percent pay what percent?
#54. To: Vicomte13 (#53)
"how the tax system actually works to so massively favor them"
#55. To: GrandIsland, Deckard (#49)
Filthy smelly Occupy Movement sympathizers. A drug loving hippie trait.
#56. To: Vicomte13, tooconservative, tomder55, sneakypete (#53)
Do you really want to understand how the tax code works, and favors them? Or are you simply going to favor them NO MATTER WHAT the truth is?
#57. To: A K A Stone (#55)
Deckard in my view is a good guy. He just wants to be left alone to do whatever he wants. Deckard values freedom and we should respect that.
#58. To: A K A Stone (#56)
The poor also have advantages in the tax code. Like paying zero.
#59. To: A K A Stone (#56)
So maybe we should have no income tax and only tax corporations since they don't pay any taxes anyway.
#60. To: Vicomte13 (#58)
(Edited)
The poor pay plenty of taxes. Everybody pays sales taxes, even the homeless when they buy their Mad Dog 20/20
#61. To: GrandIsland (#60)
But they pay those menial sales taxes with EBT cards. The poor doesn't pay Jack shit.. and most are happy living like a smelly scumbag in an apartment that smells like cigarettes, kerosene and pit bull... because they trade that lifestyle for having everyday off from work.
#62. To: Vicomte13, redleghunter (#25)
Whoever wins the next election puts two butts on the Supreme Court.
#63. To: A K A Stone, tomder55 (#41)
#64. To: TooConservative (#62)
(Edited)
IOW, your constant protestations aside, you simply do not give a shit about unlimited abortion. Just as I'd come to expect.
#65. To: A K A Stone (#41)
#66. To: Vicomte13 (#61)
1) The food stamp benefit is about $130 per month. Nobody is living high on the hog for that.
#67. To: Vicomte13, A K A Stone (#59)
So instead have the Treasury print the $1.5 trillion directly and spend it, reducing the amount that needs to be taken in taxes to $1,87 trillion. We currently collect about $3.4 trillion, so give money printing back to the Treasury, end the Federal Reserve, print $1.5 billion directly, and cut taxes by 50% across the board, and you'll stimulate the hell out of the economy, and break the hold of the Fed on America's future.
So instead have the Treasury print the $1.5 trillion directly and spend it, reducing the amount that needs to be taken in taxes to $1,87 trillion.
#68. To: TooConservative (#0)
Attorneys for Club for Growth Action, a political arm of the Club for Growth, sent a letter to the Trump Organization’s General Counsel Thursday threatening a counter-suit if Trump sues their organization.
#69. To: Vicomte13, A K A Stone (#65)
what's that guitar thing he's got in his hand?
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#70. To: nolu chan (#67)
The problem with just printing a boatload of money is that is causes inflation and makes my savings and all dollars relatively worthless. If retirement incomes are not adjusted for inflation, the retirement income is rendered inadequate.
#71. To: nolu chan (#68)
$1M of free tv attention provided by The Club for Growth of Karl Rove
#72. To: TooConservative (#71)
#73. To: A K A Stone (#72)
#74. To: TooConservative (#71)
The Club is a longtime enemy of Rove and the Bushes.
At the cost of a few hundred dollars, Trump gets this article, lots of public debate, $1M of free tv attention provided by The Club for Growth, and he gets to dominate a few more news cycles while low-energy Jeb! continues to be written about mainly on milk cartons.
#75. To: TooConservative (#73)
#76. To: nolu chan (#74)
This Trump fellow is a genius at getting his opposition to pay to give him airtime. Jeb is as absent as Ferris Bueller at attendance.
#77. To: A K A Stone (#75)
Toomey had many betrayals for the establishment. Lets start with his expanded background checks idea.
#78. To: nolu chan (#67)
The problem with just printing a boatload of money is that is causes inflation and makes my savings and all dollars relatively worthless.
#79. To: TooConservative (#62)
IOW, your constant protestations aside, you simply do not give a shit about unlimited abortion. Just as I'd come to expect.
#80. To: TooConservative (#76)
(Edited)
trainwreck for the GOP.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]