11.01.07
THIS TIME it will be harder for John Kerry to have it two ways He cant be for and against a presidential campaign
otherwise it is something other than a sales tax
do you know how much tax that is!!
CryHavoc Chevy will have to pay extra 23% for thie steel extra 23% for thier plastics
nor would you be.,….only for new goods and services
extra 23% for thier wiring
CryHavoc.. ALL my goods are new
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)
extra 23% for thier leather
KoBushi…the steelmaker no longer would have th tax compliance costs under the present days sytem system
it would have been taxed 48% before I bought it
So, the cost of said chevy would go up at LEAST 23%… and THEN they would have t add an other 23% CryHavoc the have no tax costs either!
Harry Pothead and Load of the Rings are no-fly-zones for me. Geek material
lol
You keep claiming there are all these “imbedded taxes” but that just isn’t reality
23% for all their raw materials and then the end customer buying the car doesn’t see this 23% tax??? they just see a bottom line price as though there is no tax? that’s not a consumption tax! that’s totally misleading.
Chevrolat does not eat corporate taxes KoBushi…they pass their tax cost donw the line
that’s not going to help people reduce their consumption
down
that will only ruin businesses!
manufactures don’t pay shit in taxes CryHavoc, their supplies are tax-free CryHavoc why can’t you read what I type?
nope
CryHavoc “corporate tax” is on INCOME it isn’t som mysical phantom tax that increasts costs
corporate tax is not sales tax cry
he supplies they get already have tax imbedded in them
NO THEY DO NOT
bu they time the customer bought something the cost has gone up 79% + their 23%
CryHavoc no they don’t
Yes they do
WHERE?
cry no they do not
where it the tax coming from and where is it going to?
*sigh*
where cry?
if you have a resale number you are not taxed
where’s the tax coming from?
do too … do not … do too … do not … what is this? 1st grade folks?
Chevrolet or the acme pencil company are NOT goingg to eat the taxes TEHY pay as a corporation…
where is the embedded tax?
CryHavoc “corporate tax” is on INCOME
I already explained where it is
no you haven’t
12• 11Thanks for the +v 12•
Chevrolet pays income taxes…
YOu said income tax goes away
channel vs cryhavoc
its under the hood - hidden in the left corner
battle of the century
YOU SAID NO MORE INCOME TAX
you ca’t pass INCOME tax on to anyone CryHavoc… all it means is you have t pay MORE income tax
they pass that cost on to you
so that’s gone!
i agree with fairtax but there is some problems with it
the biggest problem with the fairtax is its opponents…. 
you can not charge for products you by.. to sell to the public
CryHavoc is saying the corporate income taxes are considered a cost of doing business and calculated into the price of the goods. That can certainly be done.
they would have to fix that
errr, pro-ponents
Yaakov….yep IMBEDDED
CryHavoc so then, even if what they save in not paying “income tax”… it isn’t going to offset what they hav to PAY in supplies sales tax (which they currently don’t pay)
and you’re saying under the new system all of that goes away that there is no income tax
So, at the very LEAST, a new vehicle will cost 23% more than it does now
and now there is just a consumption tax so is Chrysler going to pay a national sales tax on their raw materials?
Since thier current supplies are tax-free
the Fairtax is a substitute for the Corp income taxes they would be paying…
or does the car buyer pay it when they buy the car? or both?
i sure as HELL would love to pay 25% more on a new vehicle and pay no income tax 
the prices of goods would not be affected…
if we taxed cell phones, and legalized prostitution, we’d be so in the black, we’d have to expand into mexico
KoBushi.. no 76%more and then the 23% tax you would pay thats 99% more
you’re not answering the question
the market would straighten that out if needed
Where is this 23% charged
It is also true that manufacturers pay tax on equipment used in production (with depreciation worked in.)
on Chrysler’s raw materials?
Yaakov not anymore
or the car buyer at the dealership? or both?
ajofi…the same price they would more or less under the old system…
that does not answer the fucking question
but they would have 100% of their pay
Yaakov under the new tax laws since bush came int office, all such equipment can be written off 100% with no depreciation
At what POINT in the sales transaction does the 23% occur?
I just answered it ajofi…
no you didn’t where in the sales process does the 23% get charged?
the Car dealership would pay the 23%
I think i’ll have a chinky for supper tonight hell yeah that sounds good
oh my god
CryHavoc well, they’d have 93% of thier pay… employeers would lop off the extra 7%, so I guess businesses could save some there
so the dealership pays to chrysler $20,000
I would be all for going back to tariffs to sustain the federal government. It would make the chicanery much more evident.
what’s a chinky?
the price would not be affected..it would remain as it was under the old system…
nharris, a racist way of saying chinese food
ohhhhhh
depending on how many times the product changed hands, you could have HUGE tax bills
sounds good.. I may go for mongolian BBQ
and then has to pay to the government $4600
because the people in the production chain no longer have to pay the crorp income tax
and then charges the customer $24,600? that’s insane
nharris….yummy!!!!
the customer comes along and pays no tax? they just see a $24,600 car? what if they negotiate down? they end up paying more than 23%!
the XCustomer would pay TT & L ..at state level just as they do now…
but no national tax
but they get 100% of their pay as take home… no more with holding
the national tax just gets “built in” you never see it on your receipt
(don’t forget, the 23% is in addition to the state sales tax)
everything just gets 23% more expensve
it is a substitute for the taxes I spoke of earlier nope
people will bootleg stuff
it will never happen
and smuggle
people want their mortgage write off
ajofi has not heard a word I said
more than 23% more expensive, depending on how many times it changes hands
and business need to be able to write off health insurance costs
peolle will have 100% of their pay…
if there is no income tax there is no way to write these costs off and make them tax free otherwise they’re effectively taxed
with more money in the infra…Interest rates would drop
with all these taxes getting collected, its time for universal healthcare anyways
they muber of people filing tax would alos drop…
won’t ever happen
the tax stream to the government would become more transparetn it will happen…. oh..the IRS would be gone too
say in my business by the time it got to me, there would be a 48% tax paid on it.. then after I paid it… 96% tax and then when I sold it,, another 23% thats 119% tax
the current system works too well for too many people
10 billion a year savings right there
CryHavoc with no IRS, who will check to be sure this 23% tax is being charged and paid?
JanetB..it would be like this for you
“We are not calling for elimination of federal taxation, which would be irresponsible and undesirable. Nor does our endorsement call for reduced federal spending. The tax reform plan we endorse is revenue neutral, collecting as much federal tax revenue as the current income tax code, including payroll withholding taxes.” Fair Tax website
lets say you had a 1 dollar basket…
thats would put small business OUT of business
**nor does our endorsement call for reduced federal spending**
JanetB I agree absolutely
12• 11Thanks for the +v 12•
im blind
the asket maker would pay the 23% from selling you the basket as a new good hey Peace
which means her basket would cost 23% more
but he no longer has to spend time or hire people to do his payroll…
does Chrylser get its raw materials tax free under this plan or not?
and she’d have to pass the 23% on t her customer, PLUS 23% of that total
what
he only pays tax on new goods and services
Um…
the payroll will still cost money to do
no she would not..
RAW materials!
He’d still have to hire people to do his payroll CryHavoc
does Chrysler pay 23% on any NEW raw materials?
she would pay the same price as she does now for the basket…
so if Chrylser uses used parts in its vehicles - no tax!
cry.. one is goes from the supplier 23% to the wholesaler 23%.. to me 23% to the customer 23%
CryHavoc no she wouldn’t
cry no I would not
CryHavoc because her basket supplier doesn’t pay tax on the materials h uses
3Joes…Daimler Chrysler is not under the insane US tax system anymore.. they are incorporated in Germany
traitors
it would cot me 3 times more cost
now i get it
td..nope..I do not blame them… better tax deal for them
so non-US companies would not pay the 23% tax? so all imports are suddenly 23% cheaper
no no no guys he’s saying because the corporate tax goes away, a company would REDUCE their raw materials price effectively by 23%
JanetB actually for most stuff more like this… Manufacturer 23% Supplier 23% Distributor 23% reginoal sales distributor 23%, ten to customer 23%
so that when they charge the national sales tax of 23%, the raw material costs the same as it does now
you would be the end user of the basket…..same price as you paid before..
Most of my parts that I sell customers go through at least a 5-company chain before thet get to me
and presumably they are building in some of their payroll costs into that part
you sell yer flowers……you would pay the 23% on the new goods and services…only for new goods and serives though…..
ko right
because payroll costs them money
you would no longer have payroll tax expenses
end payroll and the cost of the part is less
no more cap gians tax..
but now you pay it in sales tax instead of income tax i get it
Restraunts would be more exspensive
CryHavoc.. and all those before me would ADD that 23% they paid
but it’s still not going to work
Because they have to pay 23% for their food, which they currently don’t
no more sole proprietorship tax..
the cost of goods would double by the time it got to me
no more april 15 blues
no janet no no
CryHavoc april 15 blues? I pay quarterly
But restraunts
ajofi..it will work….
will not only have to pa 23% more for thier supplies
it will not work
but they will have to pay 23% more to have thier equipment repaired
because it will never have an opportunity to work
Consumption tax beats a capital and labor tax….
AND the restraunt will have to add 23% for the sale to
because capital will flow to the US to be invested
Just think if they got rid of the irs how much money they could save by getting rid o all the paper work
what it does, is it shifts the costs
CryHavoc no one is going to invest in a country were the businesses are falling like flies
KoBushi..offset by their svings…
you would need something as big as the IRS to collect teh sales tax!
CryHavoc there is ver little savings CryHavoc they might save the 7% less that they pay per employee
yes there would…
big deal
you make $100,000 on paper but you only get to keep $60,000. And you buy a car for $20,000.
no more corporate tax filings ala 1040 no more payroll deductions for FICA and Medicaid
CryHavoc thoe are only paid on income
YOu make $100,000 and you keep $100,000. You buy a car for $24,600.
no more Double taxation for the conmany
CryHavoc companies don’t pay taxes on supplies, only proffit
Everything you buy is 23% more expensive
ajofi more than that
ajofi…nope
because most thngs yu buy go thru multiple distributors
you don’t get something for nothing cry
so let’s say you pay $1 for somethng now…
it has to cost more because there is no income tax
and it goes thru 5 distributors first
Cost of Doing Business taxs would be replaced by the Fairtax… so it would not ber 23 % nmore
there are no “cost of doing business” taxes only income tax
yes there is… yes there is
well and in some cities like a small $500 liceanse
you didn’t follow me earlier, those five levels of distribution have significantly lower cost under Fair Tax because there is no income tax for the corporation and there is no FICA which they have to pay on all their payroll.
insignificant ajofi no they don’t ajofi income tax isn’t a cost
sure it is
income tax is paid after the cost
it’s a cost of doing business payroll taxes are a cost of doing business
When Chevy makes a car…the the taxes they pay on the profit from that vehicle…are passed on to the consumer in the price…
they are deductible against income
fairtax does _not_ get rid of FICA or medicare taxes - those payroll taxes would remain
Fair Tax *DOES* get ride of FICA
ajofi okay 7% on low wages, big whoop
read it
3 Joes..yes it does
but they are still paying SS… employers do not pay income tax now… it comes out of the employee pay
NOPE not under Fair Tax
you match SS which you would still have to do
SS and Medicare tax go away NOPE
Social Security and Medicaid would be funded from the consumption tax
no matching
no he said income and medicare
FICA tax is gone there is no payroll tax NONE no income tax and no FICA
the matching would alos go away no more
So, that $1 product, the manuf maybe can cut the price 7% with his savings… so now it costs $0.93…. but
KoBushi do you not have to match SSI deductions?
but I am still by the time the product gets to me paying 100 % or more… for the product for the consumption taxes passed on no thanks
CryHavoc nope CryHavoc all subcontractors
i fired all of my employees
well most businesses do….
cause I am not a comsumer, I am a seller
not small businesses
CryHavoc but that “match” is the 7% I was refering to
they would no longer have to pay that matching sum
most small businesses use contractors
CryHavoc because you will still have to pay them the other 7% that is currently withheld
that’s 14.65%
KoBushi…there is the matter of the producers of the supplies to you pass their tax liability along to you in the price
Now then, this $1 item, saves 7% from not matching funds…. now it costs 0.93… now it goes thru *5* distributors … and costs 2.618234286 $2.62
I do the same….albeit on a smaller level
15.3% sorry
You ned to read the book…..
it has no chance people want deductions
yes it does
you need to look at ho supplies are actally changed hands CryHavoc
exactly zero chance
clearly the book has nothing to do wit the supply chain especially on new products
the current system encourages cheating and hiding assets…
cryhavoc is making excuses for his cheating ways
the new system will also
remove the tax on capital…and capital will arrive
the new system encourages cheating and hiding sales
hey fish
lol _3Joeys
except that it will penalize consumption
3Joes…yer right…
yeah, and the new system makes cheating EASY because there is no IRS
so anyone in the business of making money off consumption will make less money
so no on can catch you
that’s the point of a national sales tax and why it is called a consumption tax
but remember I said the fairtax would drastically reduce the number of filers??
KoBushi, there would have to be something as big as the IRS to make sure the new tax was collected
transparency…
12• 11Thanks for the +v 12•
3Joes..not even…
_3Josephs easily
HR 25 has a companion bill with it…
CryHavoc it might reduce the number of filings… but the size of each filing wll be larger
it would strike Amendment XVI
just think of how many folks it would take just to check every single ebay auction
The real issue is total spending by government, not tax reform. bullshit cry Real Tax does NOTHING about the 16th amendment
ajofi…to rein in the spending by the government….. you need to determine what they are spending and how much
a law cannot repeal an amendment
and knowing the government, they’d exempt themselves from pay the tax anyway
2 PM): it would strike Amendment WRONG
ajofi…I said a comapnion bill that would kill XVI..and the IRS listen
a law can’t do that
are you really that niave? here is a clue: second amendment. Tons of laws effectively repealed it.
3Joes….no place they could hide with a streamlined tax system
if the gov’t wants to, it can crap all it wants on the bill of rights.
bill of rights is different
our budget OUGHT to be strictly percentages..
Lupine….it might take a con con to strike XVI…
bill of rights takes power away from government
streamlined? the federal government would suddenly need info on every single purchase in the US - that’s a lot of data to deal with
16th amendment gives power to government they won’t let that go
but once the governments revenue stream is made more transparent…then we will be more clearly be albe to see the wastee
total budget OUGHT to inherently equal total intake. No debt [ except when war is officially declared ]
waste with Holding is a way of hiding what they do
FORCE them to make decisions if they want to boost funding in one area.. where to cut funding.
that makes no sense
don’t you mean “no deficit” ?
the 16th Amendment was illegal….
You understand that no matter what, debt is going to take decades to repay
well it’s not now
e-her: well.. both
power to the people…
withholding is a way to keep from having to borrow huge amounts of money to keep the government running until the next 15 Apr
an amendment by definition is legal
e-herP No it would not.
e-Hernick generations and generations
e-hernick: stop every single socialist program tomorrow. Use the money to pay downt eh debt.
your children and your children’s children, etc. etc. will be in debt
with holding is a way the government has of hiding its true spending habits
e-hernick: every single last god damn program not listed as the domain of the federal governmen tin the constitution.. stop spending a single dome on it.
that’s the US way
so you want government to run a massive budget surplus, that is, to tax us way more than it spends, right?
no govt. but spend spend spend
3Joes..we got along with out it until WW II….
tax’n'cut
military doesn’t fund itself
e-hernick: no.. SCALE the budget with tax intake.
“The consumption tax, on the other hand, can only be regarded as a payment for permission-to-live. It implies that a man will not be allowed to advance or even sustain his own life, unless he pays, off the top, a fee to the State for permission to do so. The consumption tax does not strike me, in its philosophical implications, as one whit more noble, or less presumptuous, than the income tax.” Murray Rothburn
e-hernick..thats the dems dream…. but piss away the extra for more bottles of Malt Liquor
What is fair about allowing the government to confiscate 23 percent of the value of every new good and service?
this is the start of a boston globe article THIS TIME, it will be harder for John Kerry to have it two ways. He can’t be for and against a presidential campaign. The pressure is on to choose: Will he run for president or Senate in 2008?
we have consumption tax, it makes a lot of money
survivor horror is my favourite type of singleplayer shooter game
tax’n'cut? By that I mean, you keep tax stable or raise taxes, while cutting on spending in order to achieve a budget surplus that will be used to pay the debt
ajofi..I thought for a second there you got it…but apparently you don’t
service is not exempt
e-Hernick that’s crazy isn’t the what the republicans were supposed to stand for?
e-hernick..or grow the economy while shrinking or halting government growth
SUPPOSED TO
grrrr`, nah Republicans are supposed to stand for CUT and CUT not TAX and CUT
yeah the republicans are real good at cutting back on spending
the GOP stands for “We will not steal as much”
in theory?
but the Damns are ramping up for a merry 2 years…
sure
Lupine heheh
lupine is calling jewish people cheap
as if the republicans haven’t been already and reagan before that funny how clinton managed to balance the books ;p
grrrr..no he sis not..
dems can’t raise taxes without bush’s concurrence
Pudgy penguins beat James Bond ‘by a flipper’
prohected surpluses do not count
actually they can.. by not ‘extending the tax cuts’..
ivy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! wassup?
that’s not a raise that’s allowing the statute to take effect
yeah how about retracting some of the tax cuts the repubs made? that would be a good start
all the tax cuts from a few years ago expire automagically - no action means higher taxes
grrrr and watch the economy stall….
retracting tax cuts? are you out of your mind?
cryhavoc :????/ there was once outrage when a president did a veto for reasons other than constitutionality
no action = tax increase by the democrats.
Hasn’t tax revenue gone up since the cuts?
Lupine|, yep, but the media will never say that
why repubicans introduced tax cuts
Bill….thats a good thing…anything the damnocrats can do to ruin the economy…a good thing
Yaakov, yup
Yaakov…yep
I wonder how many of the poor the Democrats are going to put back ON the tax rolls by letting the cuts expire.
Yaakov, we set 3 new records this year for tax receipts
cry, yeah
yeah the poor got the cuts?
tax and spend
the poor do not create jobs…
The poor were removed from the rolls
instead of spend and spend
So here is what I suggest; we must move to a Tax’n'Cut economy. First, let’s lower the income tax. Second, let’s create a massive new federal sales tax system, modelled after FairTax, that will balance out lost revenue from the income tax, and increase total revenue through taxation of illegal aliens. Third, let’s become soft on crime; release a million prisoners in a year, lower law enforcement, end the war on drugs and the domestic war on terror. Fourth, let’s cut social programs and welfare to the minimum possible, and let’s stop encouraging women to become welfare queens by producing babies. Let’s offer free contraception to every person on welfare. Fifth, let’s start taxing churches. Sixth, let’s merge the smaller red states together in order to achieve economies of scale. Those states are huge drains on the federal government, and perhaps merging them with make them less of a burden to the rest of America.
Some of them anyway.
like the GOP
grrrr`, tax credit for kids - goes back to the old level
actually, the lowest tax bracket had the largest tax cuts [ percentage wise ]
really? lol
and many of the poorest GOT FREE MONEY, thanks to bush’s tax cut yes, the lowest bracket of 15% was cut by 1/3 to 10%
is that why the highest got the biggest cuts?
e-hernick…and diminish the states’ power and influence..no way
yes, I personally hate the EITC - its welfare - call it welfare - not a “tax”
tax rates are in PERCENTAGES, not in absolute dollars. indeed, it IS welfare
heh I got the EITC a few times…
give me all your Lupines
no, we’re not reducing the power and influence of states that deserve it.. the states that pay more than their fair share of federal spending, like california, need to stop subsidizing the red states and the farm states that consume all the federal funding without giving it back
amazing..I am white
one’s race doesn’t factor into the EITC
e-hernick…then return to the states their rights…so that not as much money goes to the fed to be redistributed 3Joes..I know..I was surprised is all single white male…EITC funds LOL
12• 11Thanks for the +v 12•
the red states are despondent and dependent on welfare.. they have low populations, low education, low income and they are a huge financial drain on the federal government. And they get hugely disproportional representation in congress.. well, this must stop. I suggest that we start merging the tiny underperforming states together.
the federal income tax is the #1 largest socialist wealth-redistribution in the world I believe.
then we cut on spending massively
(the whole “real” reason for the EITC is to make the tax compliance (% of folks filing federal returns) numbers higher)
e-hernick….crap
and use the newfound budget surplus to repay the debt
you want to reduce states rights…
lol
while implementing a national sales tax that is similar to fairtax but that complements the income tax
“you can’t handle the truth”
grow the economy to cover the debt…and constrain governmt
grow it in the red states?
in order to grow the economy you’ve got to stop hurting the best performing states
do we need redneck production?
e-hernick…thats what KoBushi thinks will happen
the national sales tax idea is dead … it always was … the government will _never_ permit the income tax to go away (but they’ll happily add a new sales tax 
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/19/rangel.draft.ap/ WASHINGTON (AP) — Americans would have to sign up for a new military draft after turning 18 if the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee has his way.
look, the red states are pulling everybody down.. the farmers are getting subsidies and hurting the technologically advanced states by draining federal funding
e-hernick which means reduing the fed control..not increasing it
those states that are profitables are hurt terribly by the bankrupt states
I am for killing the subsidies…
I would LOVE to say “thank you, fucking idiots voters” for that!
15th century Odescalchi Castle in Italy, where Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes have just been wed! Although not legally. You have to see this picture of the happy bride. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/11/19/wcruise19a.jpg
cyberfr0g, note the ages - draft for men & women from age 18 to 42
yes, but right now those states wield influence that is disproportionate
poor thing
e-hernick you want to reduce state power in favir of the fed…
CometBaby she’s been set free by scientology!
no, I want to give more power to fewer states
thats why we have a Senate and a house
I want to give more power to the states that deserve it
a compromise
while cutting down federal spending, hence reducing federal power
they have that…more House reps
I want to make congress smaller less senators
no way 2 per state…100
you should become scientologists instead of christians better fringe benefits
we need to bring the number of states down to 40 at most
is an atheist….
you get to go to an alien planet
wyoming shouldn’t exist
nope…50 is fine
grrrr`, and a free personality test too
enforce #10
Xenu save us from a democratic led house and senate!!
#10 gets fucked around by #14 unfortunately
she looks so miserable in that picture
probably because she is CometBaby or should be
A Catho-Scientologist - Interpets Jesus Engrams
right
if she wasn’t high on scientology e-rays
when you’ve just been informed that you are gongi to be the mother to an alien child..
Well I made my turkey dinner today and its all finished and everyone has gone home
#10 still has power…
whew
States rights
wolfy .. lol
first alien birth
Lupine|, Michael Jackson is being re-born?
no wonder they were slow to release pictures
Wyoming, the Dakotas, Montana, Rhode Island, Idaho, Nebraska, the Virginias, Utah, New England..
the Raelians at it again?
merge down some of these states into bigger states
#10 would have a lot more power if states threw a fucking fit everytime the fed encroached on their rights
she look like she has lost 30 lbs
in the form of cruise/holmes
e-hernick NY is part of New England
Also, Alaska should lose its senators.. Alaska isn’t worth it.
e-Hernick, yeah, Texas isn’t big enough! - add OK & KS to it
Herzen yes
Why should Alaska lose its senators?
you’d be miserable too if you were married to tom cruise
e-hernick is farting out his mouth
New York State should be divide at roughly rockland county and south
I agree, California and New York could be split in to
AK has Billions of dollars of resources
so let’s make it a protectorate
save NY cut NYC free e-hernick it is a state…. so be it
yes, NYC, Chicago and LA should become three new states. each with 2 senators.
BillFrugg, well yeah, I’d be miserable married to any man!
Herzen…hehehe
set nyc adrift, cut the moorings and let her float off into the atlantic
lol! that’s not what i meant… hehe
I mean, we’re always talking about redrawing the map of the middle east
Bill .. the first time he gave me a direct order would be the last time
I think we need to redraw the map of America first
more red states e-Hernick?
cryhavoc what should we do with new jersey
grrrr`: no, the red states should be merged together
and I get the distinct impression that guy is a bully
into one, e-Hernick?
e-Hernick, lets make it metric - 10 states wide, 5 tall - perfect squares (except for hte coastlines)
and by red states, I mean states that drain the federal ressources without giving back
lol that’s the heartland
50 states is too much
remember when she gave birth to tom’s kid? he demanded absolute silence in the room, including from her
grrrr`: exactly, the heartland should be merged down into a few states
who else might vote republican
he could kiss his nasty business goodbye lol
e-Hernick, ok, 5 wide and 5 tall
unless they get all the kickbacks and pork barrel money?
j/k
do a lorena bobbit?
hehe
he should have eaten the umbilical cord
we need to identify failed states like mississippi and save them from themselves
like he said he would
maybe the feds failed MS
grrrr`, but it makes such a nice necklace
he better not go to sleep if I go to bed with a knife under my pillow
cruise makes algore look sane
mississippi failed itself
CB sleeps with knives!!!
with Katrina as a standard to live up to, we better hope nothing worse happens
huge amounts of federal cash didn’t help it
runs with scissors
cruise doesn’t like psychiatry for a reason people
dances with Wolves
grrrr`: because psychiatrists consider him mad
CB dances with Wolfys
grrrr`, quacks are nuts
lol
right e-Hernick
grrrr`, that one he got right
speaking of quacks, Dr. Bussard is a huge quack.
“There’s no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft, and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm’s way,” Rangel said.
lol
cyberfr0g SO WE went to iraq for what
people will act more irrational and less on facts when they personally may be involved. well, no shit.
cyberfr0g for what did we go to iraq for
WMD
Mr Rangel, where did you think those volunteers came from?
fun
I doubt that would have influenced anything
oil? power?
grrrr` so we went to iraq for oil
We went to Iraq for the WMDs
where is the iraqi oil we got
BillFrugg didn’t you learn from Kerry? Only morons go into the military, as we all know.. they’re not related to washington elite
Operation Iraqi Liberation was to find WMDs nothing else.
you know what i find intresting, since democrats took over there seems to be a lot less tension and arguements in this chat room
and it did.
lol
not my fault if it’s so badly run gopp_ all i said was that was the motivation
imagine how angry Hillary must be right now
I do not concur with your assessment.
bah, bullshit
grrr what evidence do you have that we went to iraq for oil…especially seeing as how we arent getting any more oil than before
Republicans have been against the draft since we tore it down in the 1970s. (Eliminated the draft) we don’t want it back and it has nothing to do with making decisions to go to war or not.
maybe we went to war to shut down some oil supplies
i think we went to war to SAVE THE KURDS!
raise the prices
A democrat in congress has called for the draft, ostensibly as a joke, however, it means that Democrats support the draft. I heard this argument here the other day.
Its irrelevant. And Whats his face is a damn fool. (Rangel)
picotero, why would we do that?
lol! we spend more on taxes than oil
picoetero, we could shut down our own oil supplies if we wanted to do that
http://static.flickr.com/102/300056981_3261eb32ae.jpg — CB’s “pillow” knife
and why would we wanna spend more money on oil thats the dumbest thing ever
we went to iraq because we are on a mission from GOD
e-Hernick, Rangel has had this bill floating for over 2 years now
The war was right and I would have done it again knowing all I know now.
cut down on SVU production? god told me to declare war
Tailor, well considering oil prices tripled, I dunno
Thank God we don’t have Carter in office!
12• 11Thanks for the +v 12•
picotero oil is under 60
We went into Iraq because Saddam was a wildcard and a joker, and he was destablizing whether or not he had any direct links to al queda. They were still an enemy of the USA and the Middle east
freemrkt, is there anything you would change though ? Seems like the iraq has gone to shit because of our bad planning
picotero oil prices are down
oil is a bit under $56 now
FreeMrkts is that why we sold him anthrax at first?
Purpdank it has not turned in to shit grrrr` yes so what
tasty anthrax
we where figiting the russians grrrr` do you rember the cold war
You can bet Rhetoric aside, not one leader in the middle east cried when Saddam was taken out, they popped champagne.
and the kurds?
grrrr` we helped the kurds
gopp even our top politicans and military personal all agree the post war planning was bad and things are getting out of control in iraq
gopp, true, now the price is only slightly more than double instead of triple
by takingout saddam
you disagree with the military leaders gopp ?
Purpdank top polticans wrong
yes they freed the kurds
they have not said iraq turned bad
Maybe the turks didnt like it but then they fucked up our original battle plan anyway
Purpdank that a lie
that is why the war was declared
Many of our military leaders didnt like Rumsfeld.
Purpdank some qb arm chair generals said it gone bad
SAVE THE KURDS!
The turks wouldnt care if Saddam committed genocide against the Kurds.
but they have not been in iraq Purpdank stop trolling
dude im not trolling simmer down
But most the middle eastern governments considered saddam a threat.
yeah, just invade
in my opnion your saying stuff that unture
don’t know what to do after good stuff
or half true
that takes planning or lack of it
gopp you seriously think iraq is going good ?
yes
wow
not in bahgahdad
it’s going gggggggggggggggggggreat!
but in other parts or iraq sure
grreeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaat
in baghada thier still some trouble but in most parts of iraq it oh k
’some’ trouble ? haha
only in bagdad? lol
iraq is turning into a civil war
sure as hell alot better than any other significant gorund war we’ve been in.
and you call it ’some’ trouble
thier lots of trouble in bahghad
nice
Purpdank prove it
Gopp, Its not going good. But thats a lot different than saying we didnt do the right thing we did. Saddam gone is worth it even if we dont succeed 100% on Iraq
