Lucky...

I think heterosexuals should be forbidden to procreate at any age until they've proven that they won't have gay kids. It's soooo simple. No straight sex = no gay kids = no gay marriage debate and no "don't ask, don't tell debate" Ok, so at what age should gay parents be allowed to procreate?

did you mean biological ? 30 sounds good till i moved into a house next door to 2 forty year olds living with their working mother . caveat 30 and on your own ! We've had spelling Nazis come and spelling Nazis go, they are all as needless the ones before them.

Is this you? http://images.paraorkut.com/img/funnypics/images/g/gay_cheerleader-12791.jpg

Nah its more like Pravda was to the Communist Party in the Soviet Union. It never ceases to amaze me that all these people who "LEAN" to the right around here...... parrot the daily talking points as thought up by Lush Rimjob, Sean Insannity, and Glenn "The Crying Man" Beck and still think their "news" is "Fair and Balanced" It never ceases to amaze me that all these people who "LEAN" to the left around here....parrot the daily talking points as thought up by Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz and still think there's "no liberal bias in the media" And then go research and post facts such as these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3 http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm

You'll find he's the purveyor of 1-liners; he's the cheerleader for the few who can piece together a lame argument. Obviously that side thrives one person making a lame claim and the rest rallying behind it.

WHO is it that's buying Obama's bullshit, again?

If you don't like him - don't watch him. He is not a News Reporter . . . He is there as entertainment. He's there to rally the idiots. RNC Michael Steele or the former RNC, of course now gay as many R's are, Ken Melhlman are supposed to be the voice/face of the party, but you're lying if you claim other than the voice/face being Hannity, Limbaugh, etc, etc.

Which is done by Reagan and GWB; can you start to make sene? Which ones, the opnes where we match teh world in military spending? Or the ones enacted by GWB to save the banks? Or the ones enacted by Obama/Dems in congress to save the auto industry and the flip the GDP, curd the unemp freefall? Be more specific. Oh Bull fucking shit, taxes aren'g going to increase at all for your brkt, the 5% increase is for teh top brkt and I have a sneaking suspicion you aren't a millionaire. And the fed has control of your state tax? These are the lies that keep your rhetoric going. You're right, you must have loved the Clinton admin if that's your meauring stick.....oh wait, you didn't like them either. Again, your args are just worthless and inconsistent.

ShrubCo used reconciliation to pass TEMPORARY tax cuts, because they could not pass them any other way. Reconciliation, you know, that horrible trick that the evil Obama administration used. The TEMPORARY tax cuts are to expire, as scheduled, and the rescums are whipping the ignorant sheeple into a frenzy over the issue. How can it NOT be ShrubCo's fault that the Democrats are going to allow the tax cuts to END AS PLANNED, in the legislation that passed? Are you people really that stupid and easily led? The answer is a resounding YES, WE ARE!!! You bitch about the record defecits, but want to borrow BILLIONS of dollars to pay for the tax cuts for the top three percent of households in the USA. It is hard to believe that you all are that stupid, but there it is, the facts don't lie. you are right facts dont lie fact are gov to big and we are spending too much period Said the party member who elected Reagan and GWB, who both took a stable debt/spending picture and slammed the debt via runaway spending and left a huge deficit for their successors. At least make sense.

ShrubCo used reconciliation to pass TEMPORARY tax cuts, because they could not pass them any other way. Reconciliation, you know, that horrible trick that the evil Obama administration used. The TEMPORARY tax cuts are to expire, as scheduled, and the rescums are whipping the ignorant sheeple into a frenzy over the issue. How can it NOT be ShrubCo's fault that the Democrats are going to allow the tax cuts to END AS PLANNED, in the legislation that passed? Are you people really that stupid and easily led? The answer is a resounding YES, WE ARE!!! You bitch about the record defecits, but want to borrow BILLIONS of dollars to pay for the tax cuts for the top three percent of households in the USA. It is hard to believe that you all are that stupid, but there it is, the facts don't lie. That side is drawn to morons, look at AZ Gov Brewer, she can't even get out a sentence with her debate against Goddard, refused to have any more debates, as with Palin, and Brewer's ratings go from 14% to 22%. If I have a candidate I like and they refuse further debate that their oppositions want, I'm thinking they aren't trustworthy. That side likes morons.

That's the latest. Guess who his runningmate would be? Obviously Palin, they deserve each other. The guy is delluded.

And other than Naziism, so are the others.

It's a liberal conspiracy I'm sending the balck choppers now.

Aside from your rhetoric, we agree, you just can't help but to act like an *******. If this matter were flipped, you'd be calling this an activist judge, but since it's a good ole boy judge you'll just cautiously disagree. We're on the same page, it's pathetic to run the country from the bible, goo is not a person and this is early stage goo. WHat your president did 9 years ago was outright pathetic, I think you agree.

Too bad it wasn't 1965, it could be a horrible black and white horror movie.

Well, posting data that doesn't tell the whole story leads to incomplete discussions and often incorrect attributions. Qualitative discussion is necessary to figure out what needs to be considered before you start plugging and chugging to see what correlates. Data is important, no doubt, as without it you're left with conjecture. But attribution without understanding is actually dangerous as opposed to conjecture which is merely useless. Simple generalizations about the economy and how it will react to a single input parameter (at non-trivial values) are invariably wrong. That's really wonderful there, but you should actually address the data and then point out the shortcomings, rather than summarily, unilatterally discarding it. So go back and do that, rather than just making it obsolete or incomplete for lack of an argument. Also, as with p[olitical science, fiscal sciences are somewhat the same; we don't have the ability to test, retest and test a thousand more times as with many clinical experiments where we run 1 and only independent variable, then a different one and so on until we find the dependent variable. Political sciences are somewhat a bastard science where we look at the limited data we have and draw conclusions. Tell me why everytime we lower taxes things go to fuck? Why then when we raise taxes they heal? And I'm talking debt, growth, jobs, etc; it's pretty consistent. Then we factor in the common sense element; bean counters run the very rich and big corps, so wouldn't they advise their clients to reinvest in order to shild their profits? And when taxes are low like with Reagan and both Bush's, wouldn't that same accountant tell his client to pull out profits before taxes are raised? I mean, 35% is about as low as it gets, run that to 60-70% and it's a no-brainer to reinvest. Like with math equations you work with in class, as you finish you look at it generally to see if it makes sense and doesn't it make sense as well as teh data suggests that high taxes = reinvest, low taxes = take profit?

I don't give a fuck.

The jumping is irrelevant, but your (lack of) economics background is highly so, particularly given your tendency to try to simplify economics to single variables. Funny, you claim to be so complex, yet you can't show me a maj fed tax cut that has benefitted us. WOW, I don't wanna be that complex where I can't even address an issue.

Visited The Onion News Network lately? Convict a president via impeachment lately?

+1

Those 8 posts you speak of were well thought out and structured replies covering the points they were replying to remarkably well. Then the next 8 replys are from those that cannot counter the points because they were so well explained and this logic has me thinking. I never thought of the super high taxes for the upper earners like that before but it makes perfect sence. better to have the majority of the cash invested into other projects to keep an economy going, than to have it horded. It obviously makes sense to those that have made the previous 7 replies also, as there would at least be some sort of attemt to reply to the content but instead the imminent stabs at irrelevant points to get the last word in. After a couple of months off and returning to this forum it really is pathetic to see the same narrow mindedness prevail. It is refreshing however, to see the word 'invade' being used now days intead of some bullshit freedom fighting ploy. If someone is going to be a cunt, then at least they should be honest about it! Thx man, but as you know, the drones can't address them so they atatck the poster as a distraction. You've seen it a million times from the same posters. I posted an article before that states it the way I've been saying it for years, let me see if I can find it. http://www.alternet.org/economy/106979/ Ya, here it is, it really lays it out. The data is irrefutable that high taxes force reinvestment, hence jobs and growth. I've been saying this long before I read this,but thie illustrates the way I feel and again, the way the data reads. To think otherwise is insanity: try the same thing and expect diff results. As you said: better to have the majority of the cash invested into other projects to keep an economy going, than to have it horded. Low taxes, profits taken out, economy falls flat and wages drop; a neo-con's dream. After a couple of months off and returning to this forum it really is pathetic to see the same narrow mindedness prevail. Usual suspects, same drivel and unwillingness to address data.

Those 8 posts you speak of were well thought out and structured replies covering the points they were replying to remarkably well. Then the next 8 replys are from those that cannot counter the points because they were so well explained and this logic has me thinking. I never thought of the super high taxes for the upper earners like that before but it makes perfect sence. better to have the majority of the cash invested into other projects to keep an economy going, than to have it horded. It obviously makes sense to those that have made the previous 7 replies also, as there would at least be some sort of attemt to reply to the content but instead the imminent stabs at irrelevant points to get the last word in. After a couple of months off and returning to this forum it really is pathetic to see the same narrow mindedness prevail. It is refreshing however, to see the word 'invade' being used now days intead of some bullshit freedom fighting ploy. If someone is going to be a cunt, then at least they should be honest about it! Actually, the next post attached are from people that don't consider the post worth reading. It usually says the same thing over and over and over and over again. The credibility has been shot. The posts get glanced over as if they are commercials in an action show. You can't show me a major fed tax that has benefitted the masses, you just keep attacking the person.

You also thought an impeachment was a conviction, so take it for what it's worth.

Back in the '40s, '50s, and early '60s. One chart here: www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php AKA the best, sustained economic years of the US. When money is taken from one entity by another, it is normal for the taker to be better off. Eisnstein, as I've pointed out, the uber rich don't pay those taxes, they have bean counters telling them how much to spend to avoid these taxes, which stimulates the economy, creates jobs, etc. Under low taxes, the bean counters advise the uber rich to pull out their cash while they can until some president with a conscience comes along and forces investment.

Why post then?