When you listen to Al Gore!!
Harry F. Dope
Sun Apr 20, 5:36 AM ET
PARIS (AFP) - Hailed until only months ago as a silver bullet in the fight
against global warming, biofuels are now accused of snatching food out of
the mouths of the poor. Billions have been poured into developing sugar- and
grain-based ethanol and biodiesel to help wean rich economies from their
addiction to carbon-belching fossil fuels, the overwhelming source of
man-made global warming.
Heading the rush are the United States, Brazil and Canada, which are eagerly
transforming corn, wheat, soy beans and sugar cane into cleaner-burning
fuel, and the European Union (EU) is to launch its own ambitious programme.
But as soaring prices for staples bring more of the planet's most vulnerable
people face-to-face with starvation, the image of biofuels has suddenly
changed from climate saviour to a horribly misguided experiment.
On Friday, the head of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) said biofuels
"posed a real moral problem" and called for a moratorium on using food crops
to power cars, trucks and buses.
The vital problem of global warming "has to be balanced with the fact that
there are people who are going to starve to death," said Dominique
Strauss-Kahn.
"Producing biofuels is a crime against humanity," the UN's special
rapporteur for the right to food, Jean Ziegler of Switzerland, said earlier.
Biofuels may still be in their infancy but they are growing rapidly, with
annual production leaping by double-digit percentages.
In a speech on Wednesday that set down a target for reducing US carbon
emissions, George W. Bush pointed to legislation requiring US producers to
supply at least 36 billion gallons (136 billion litres) of renewable fuel by
2020.
In 2007, 20 percent of grain -- 81 million tonnes -- produced in the United
States was used to make ethanol, according to US think tank the Earth Policy
Institute, which predicts that the percentage will jump to nearly a quarter
this year.
"We are looking at a five-fold increase in renewable fuel," Bush's top
climate change advisor, Jim Connaughton, said in Paris on Thursday at a
meeting of the world's major greenhouse-gas polluters.
But more than half of that legislatively-mandated production would come from
"second-generation" biofuels made from non-food sources such as switchgrass
and wood byproducts, he said.
The EU's and the Brazilian delegates in Paris contested the link between
biofuels and the world food crisis.
"This is highly exaggerated," Sergio Serra, Brazil's ambassador for climate
change, told AFP.
"There is no real relation of cause and effect between the expansion of the
production of biofuels and the raising of food prices. At least it is not
happening in Brazil."
EU Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said experts would report back by
the end of May on how to guarantee that Europe's planned biofuel boost would
not impinge on the environment or the poor.
"There are a lot of concerns about social impacts, rising food prices and
environment issues, and for all those reasons we want to insist on
sustainability criteria in our legislation," he said.
Defenders of biofuels say food shortfalls have multiple causes, including a
growing appetite for meat among the burgeoning middle class in China and
India.
On average, it takes more than four kilos (eight pounds) of grain to produce
one kilo (two pounds) of pork, and two kilos (four pounds) of grain to yield
a kilo (two pounds) of beef.
Climate change may well be a contributing factor.
Some scientists fear rising temperatures and shifting rainfall patterns may
be worsening water scarcity in key agriculture areas such Australia's wheat
belt, and rice-growing deltas may be hit by saline intrusion from rising
seas.
In addition, the surging cost of oil has had an indirect impact on many poor
people, adding to the pinch caused by rising food prices.
--
"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno."
hanson
::: unemployment, inflation, global warming and starvation...
>
"Harry F. Dope" <BitterA...@earthlink.com> wrote in message
news:480bbed5$0$9539$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
Biofuels under attack as world food prices soar:
<http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/d31902d391fc2010>
Hailed until only months ago as a silver bullet in the fight
against global warming, biofuels are now accused of
for staples bring people face-to-face with starvation, and the
image of biofuels has suddenly changed from climate saviour to
a horribly misguided experiment.
"posed a real moral problem" and called for a moratorium on using
food crops to power cars, trucks and buses.
rapporteur for the right to food, Jean Ziegler of Switzerland, said earlier.
>
That's another typical fuck-up instigated and promulgated by
the Green shits.
(1) First the Green bastards declared that everything was polluted,
collected billions in permit charges, user- and recycling fees for
themselves, and then drove all good paying jobs from the US
into India and China.
(2) Then the Enviro turds declared that Nuke energy was
polluting the earth and forced a moratorium on building new
nuke power plants which pressed the energy producers to
switch to fossil fuels which released lots of CO2 into the air.
(3) Then the green cocksuckers in Al Gore's bandwagon cried
that CO2 causes AGW and that "sustainable fuels" must be
produced from corn or other food staples...
... and now we end up with starving people by the millions...
>
So, the enviros are at the root of events that brought us high
unemployment, inflation, global warning and starvation...
>
Any and all Greenies should be held personally responsible for
the consequences of their green actions with their own personal
liberty and wealth at stake.
>
Years ago, poster Eric Gisin had a prophetic notion when he said:
<http://groups.google.com/group/alt.org.sierra-club/msg/5bf027613f44f4fa>
"Fucking Greens should be shot for making the world so stupid".
>
Nothing in recent history has been so bad and so corrupt as the
Green movement. --- It is merely a continuation of the planning
type that occurred under the Brown banner and then the Red one.
>
Green Crimes, Green Scams, Green Extortions & Green Lies:
<http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/14968cc3ee9939d4>
<http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/70ed6372eccc32ba>
= Enviros use the same great lies of yore. Only the color changed.
= (A) Environmentalism is Communism in Green...
= (B) Environmentalism is Nazism in Green...
= (C) Environmentalism makes the Poor poorer and the Rich richer.
>
... Yet all you class 3 enviros, you hordes of little green idiots
you keep on cheering for green causes, oblivious to that fact
that the Green sharpies are fucking you and fucking you over...
until you can't get a job when you come out of school, or lose
your home, or can't fill up your gas tank to get to work...
Serves you right!... you gullible green morons... AHAHAHA...
Thanks for the laughs..... ahahaha... ahahanson
SgtMinor
> Biofuels under attack as world food prices soar
> Sun Apr 20, 5:36 AM ET
> PARIS (AFP) - Hailed until only months ago as a silver bullet in the fight
> against global warming, biofuels are now accused of snatching food out of
> the mouths of the poor.
Another straw man knocked down. Silver bullet, my ass.
Any article that starts off with such a nonsensical premise cannot be
taken seriously. There may have been some blithering idiots who argued
that biofuels would be the answer, but anyone who has paid attention to
this industry knows that there have been doubts about the concept from
the beginning.
V-for-Vendicar
> against global warming, biofuels are now accused of snatching food out of
> the mouths of the poor.
Wow, Opec is pulling out the stops on this Propaganda campaign.
V-for-Vendicar
"SgtMinor" <Sa...@the.old.folks.home.invalid> wrote
> Any article that starts off with such a nonsensical premise cannot be
> taken seriously. There may have been some blithering idiots who argued
> that biofuels would be the answer, but anyone who has paid attention to
> this industry knows that there have been doubts about the concept from the
> beginning.
Correct. You should ask yourself who is behind this anti-biofuel
propaganda campaing?
Who seeks to profit from lying?
SgtMinor
It's not a Who, it's a What. And that is economics.
OPEC understands economics. Their answer to an alternative energy
threat is to drop the price of oil, making the alternative unprofitable.
That's why some suggest that there should be heavy taxes on oil. That
way OPEC's actions can be blunted and alternative energy sources
developed. But ultimately, the answer to the energy crisis is to reduce
consumption.
V-for-Vendicar
"SgtMinor" <Sa...@the.old.folks.home.invalid> wrote
> OPEC understands economics. Their answer to an alternative energy threat
> is to drop the price of oil, making the alternative unprofitable. That's
> why some suggest that there should be heavy taxes on oil. That way OPEC's
> actions can be blunted and alternative energy sources developed. But
> ultimately, the answer to the energy crisis is to reduce consumption.
Correct on all counts.
Bitter Buttock Obomber's terrorist friend William Ayers
Yet you post nothing of substance to base your idea on. Start reading
some news and get away from blogs sometime, moron.
V-for-Vendicar
> Any article that starts off with such a nonsensical premise cannot be
> taken seriously. There may have been some blithering idiots who argued
> that biofuels would be the answer, but anyone who has paid attention to
> this industry knows that there have been doubts about the concept from
> the beginning.
"Bitter Buttock Obomber's terrorist friend William Ayers"
<John...@gmail.com> wrote
> Yet you post nothing of substance to base your idea on.
Nothing but well known recent history.
What's your excuse?
MMMMMMMOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNN
Bill Ward
Is there any problem about which socialists don't think raising taxes is
the solution?
V-for-Vendicar
"Bill Ward" <bw...@REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote
> Is there any problem about which socialists don't think raising taxes is
> the solution?
Is there any problem which RepubliKKKans don't think that borrowing more
money or
reducing government income through tax reductions is the solution?
None of the socialist states are being bankrupted by Debt as the
KKKonservative AmeriKKKans state is.
Thanks to 30 years of Borrow and Spend RepubliKKKan misrule.
So long Suckers... China now owns your lazy ass.
Bret Cahill
> the solution?
Racism. Bigotry. Creationism
Bret Cahill
Phil Hays
> Is there any problem about which socialists don't think raising taxes is
> the solution?
Is there any problem to which republicans don't think that cutting taxes
is the solution?
--
Republicans are about as useless as socialists, no brain action noticeable.
Poetic Justice
>> Is there any problem about which socialists don't think raising taxes is
>> the solution?
>
> Racism. Bigotry. Creationism
>
Raised taxes to bus kids around to fix *racism*
Raised taxes to teach political correctness in schools against *bigotry*
raised taxes once again to fund research into the Big bang and Darwinism
as an alternative to creationism, taxed to put Hubble into space to see
closer to the beginning, yet creationism is still the only explanation
that is understood by most people.
Poetic Justice
> Bill Ward wrote:
>
>> Is there any problem about which socialists don't think raising taxes is
>> the solution?
>
> Is there any problem to which republicans don't think that cutting taxes
> is the solution?
Cutting taxes won't stop Liberals like Obama and Hillary from lying. It
usually makes it worse.
V-for-Vendicar
"Phil Hays" <inv...@dont.spam> wrote
> Is there any problem to which republicans don't think that cutting taxes
> is the solution?
11 trillion dollars of Borrow and Spend RepubliKKKanism.
AmeriKKKa is bankrupt morally, intellectually, and economically.
V-for-Vendicar
"Poetic Justice" <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote
> Raised taxes to bus kids around to fix *racism*
Yup. AmeriKKKa is still a racist state, but before Bussing no black man
could even come close to
running for the presidency let alone occupy the All White House.
Times have changed thanks to bussing.
"Poetic Justice" <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote
> Raised taxes to teach political correctness in schools against *bigotry*
Money well spent.
"Poetic Justice" <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote
> raised taxes once again to fund research into the Big bang and Darwinism
It's called science.
"Poetic Justice" <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote
> taxed to put Hubble into space to see closer to the beginning
Congratulations to NASA the only thing in AmeriKKKa worth keeping.
"Poetic Justice" <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote
> yet creationism is still the only explanation that is understood by most
> people.
Kahse AmeriKKKans is soe Smardt.
V-for-Vendicar
Impossible. You KKKonservative wankers sell it as a cure all for every
problem?
Can't fund a war? Cut taxes?
Need to torture some prisoners? Cut taxes.
Budget deficits? No Problem... Cut taxes.
monkey_...@yahoo.com
Democrats use taxes to pay for things, Republicans have always gotten
a free ride by accusing the Democrats of.
being the big tax spenders, while they sit back doing nothing very
useful while demanding massive amounts our tax money to be pissed away
in Iraq so they can feel like patriots.
Bill Ward
> Bill Ward wrote:
>
>> Is there any problem about which socialists don't think raising taxes is
>> the solution?
>
> Is there any problem to which republicans don't think that cutting taxes
> is the solution?
I only wish... I lean libertarian.
V-for-Vendicar
<monkey_...@yahoo.com> wrote
> Democrats use taxes to pay for things, Republicans have always gotten
> a free ride by accusing the Democrats of.
> being the big tax spenders, while they sit back doing nothing very
> useful while demanding massive amounts our tax money to be pissed away
> in Iraq so they can feel like patriots.
How many Billion in AmeriKKKan dollars did Bush fly secretly to Iraq on
crates, only to have the money disappear on him? 20 billion? 30 billion.
Ahahahahahaha... Complete incompetence.
V-for-Vendicar
"Bill Ward" <bw...@REMOVETHISix.netcom.com> wrote
> I only wish... I lean libertarian.
So you wanna fuck some kids ay? Like your Pedo Libertarian friends....
HarryNadds
<Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:
> "Phil Hays" <inva...@dont.spam> wrote
Over 6 trillion wasted on the "war on poverty".According the the kook
libs we have more people in poverty now than ever.More trillions
wasted on public education.Kids graduating from high school that can't
read or do simple math.According to liberals if there's a problem
raise taxes and throw money at it.
HarryNadds
<Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:
> <monkey_cartm...@yahoo.com> wrote
You have proof or was that from MOVEON.org??
ayatollah obama
Sometimes I am just f'n floored by how you DemonCraps think. Double
price of fuel and the price of everthing else doubles, that's basic
free market theory.
So that idea you came up with pea-brain? *really* f'n sucks.
DemonCraps.... Making the lives of poor people even more miserable!
Phil Hays
> According to liberals if there's a problem raise taxes and
> throw money at it.
According to republicans, if there is a problem, cut taxes and throw money
at it.
Kevin Cunningham
does not double when fuel prices double. For instance fuel prices
have an effect on beer but not a one to one effect.
If you want to learn more, idiot, watch public television, Barney the
Dinosaur is having a special on one plus one.
Poetic Justice
Yep it might go up five to one, there might be a beer shortage due to
oil going up too much. Because the grains won't be planted but corn
will, to make alcohol fuel.
> If you want to learn more, idiot, watch public television, Barney the
> Dinosaur is having a special on one plus one.
What worked to make you a genius, may not work for all of us, but that
seems to be a Liberal mental block. You stick with Barney and let others
find what works for them. We like to call it freedom.
ayatollah obama
>
> - Show quoted text -
You have to cook stuff to make beer.... *energy* dumbass.
You have to ship it.... *energy* dumbass
... DemonCraps.... Making the lives of poor people even more
miserable!
Poetic Justice
That's the Bush Doctrine, but he's Bi-Polar. Bush is a Liberal on
spending and a conservative on taxes, that combibation is like a MUTANT
REPUBLICRAT that will crush an economy with a single spending bill,
there is no spending he will VETO and no tax he will support.... These
Mutants are the most danger to the USA on the planet.
He grew up a REPUBLICAN and is fighting to be a Democrat, Bigger more
costly government schools and elderly prescriptions for free..... That
is the Democrat fighting his way to the surface. NO, Bush is no Reagan.
Poetic Justice
> On Apr 21, 9:23 am, HarryNadds <hoofhearte...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Kids graduating from high school that can't read
>
>
> Your illucidity index is off the scale. Did you even go to high school?
all six years of it.
Tunderbar
> Harry F. Dope wrote:
> > Biofuels under attack as world food prices soar
> > Sun Apr 20, 5:36 AM ET
> > PARIS (AFP) - Hailed until only months ago as a silver bullet in the fight
> > against global warming, biofuels are now accused of snatching food out of
> > the mouths of the poor.
>
> Another straw man knocked down. Silver bullet, my ass.
>
> taken seriously. There may have been some blithering idiots who argued
> that biofuels would be the answer, but anyone who has paid attention to
> this industry knows that there have been doubts about the concept from
> the beginning.
But it did not stop the enviro-nutbars from promoting the "green" bio-
fuel, did it?
SgtMinor
Taking care of the hungry, the sick, and the poor doesn't seem like such
a bad thing for a society to do. Shoveling trillions of dollars at big
business in the form or corporate welfare is an entirely different
issue. If you are truly concerned about the waste of your tax money, go
after corporate welfare. Corporations have taken over our government
and are gorging themselves at the expense of the people.
Poetic Justice
> HarryNadds wrote:
>> On Apr 21, 2:53 am, "V-for-Vendicar"
>> <Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:
>>> "Phil Hays" <inva...@dont.spam> wrote
>>>
>>>> Is there any problem to which republicans don't think that cutting
>>>> taxes
>>>> is the solution?
>>> 11 trillion dollars of Borrow and Spend RepubliKKKanism.
>>>
>>> AmeriKKKa is bankrupt morally, intellectually, and economically.
>>
>> Over 6 trillion wasted on the "war on poverty".According the the kook
>> libs we have more people in poverty now than ever.More trillions
>> wasted on public education.Kids graduating from high school that can't
>> read or do simple math.According to liberals if there's a problem
>> raise taxes and throw money at it.
>
>
> Taking care of the hungry, the sick, and the poor doesn't seem like such
> a bad thing for a society to do. Shoveling trillions of dollars at big
> business in the form or corporate welfare is an entirely different
If you open the door, there is no telling where it leads. The
Constitution never intended that government give away money. Once
Liberals opened that door they doomed us to the unintended consequences.
> issue. If you are truly concerned about the waste of your tax money, go
> after corporate welfare. Corporations have taken over our government
> and are gorging themselves at the expense of the people.
Liberals have taken over and their Ideology is flawed. It's like oil and
water, capitalism and Liberalism, the result is just a useless mess.
I go after all welfare, any money government takes at gun point should
go to infrastructure to make the taxpayers life better, by better I mean
better within the parameters of what the constitution directs the
government is permitted legally to do. No where does the constitution
allow for redistribution of private wealth.
Lloyd
Dog.com> wrote:
> SgtMinor wrote:
> > HarryNadds wrote:
> >> On Apr 21, 2:53 am, "V-for-Vendicar"
> >> <Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:
> >>> "Phil Hays" <inva...@dont.spam> wrote
>
> >>>> Is there any problem to which republicans don't think that cutting
> >>>> taxes
> >>>> is the solution?
> >>> 11 trillion dollars of Borrow and Spend RepubliKKKanism.
>
> >>> AmeriKKKa is bankrupt morally, intellectually, and economically.
>
> >> Over 6 trillion wasted on the "war on poverty".According the the kook
> >> libs we have more people in poverty now than ever.More trillions
> >> wasted on public education.Kids graduating from high school that can't
> >> read or do simple math.According to liberals if there's a problem
> >> raise taxes and throw money at it.
>
> > Taking care of the hungry, the sick, and the poor doesn't seem like such
> > a bad thing for a society to do. Shoveling trillions of dollars at big
> > business in the form or corporate welfare is an entirely different
>
> If you open the door, there is no telling where it leads. The
> Constitution never intended that government give away money.
"provide for the general welfare" is pretty broad. And do you have a
problem giving money away to Iraq?
>Once
> Liberals opened that door they doomed us to the unintended consequences.
>
> > issue. If you are truly concerned about the waste of your tax money, go
> > after corporate welfare. Corporations have taken over our government
> > and are gorging themselves at the expense of the people.
>
> Liberals have taken over and their Ideology is flawed. It's like oil and
> water, capitalism and Liberalism, the result is just a useless mess.
>
> I go after all welfare, any money government takes at gun point should
> go to infrastructure to make the taxpayers life better, by better I mean
> better within the parameters of what the constitution directs the
> government is permitted legally to do.
Like "provide for the general welfare" and "make all laws necessary
and proper" -- the writers wrote in general terms on purpose.
Poetic Justice
YES..."provide for the general welfare"
Is just not broad enough, to be construed as the legal right to steal
from citizens at gun point because you want to.
and
yes I have a problem with the government "giving" money.
>> Once
>> Liberals opened that door they doomed us to the unintended consequences.
>>
>>> issue. If you are truly concerned about the waste of your tax money, go
>>> after corporate welfare. Corporations have taken over our government
>>> and are gorging themselves at the expense of the people.
>> Liberals have taken over and their Ideology is flawed. It's like oil and
>> water, capitalism and Liberalism, the result is just a useless mess.
>>
>> I go after all welfare, any money government takes at gun point should
>> go to infrastructure to make the taxpayers life better, by better I mean
>> better within the parameters of what the constitution directs the
>> government is permitted legally to do.
>
> Like "provide for the general welfare" and "make all laws necessary
> and proper" -- the writers wrote in general terms on purpose.
>
``We the People of the United States, in Order to form a *more* perfect
Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the
common Defense, *promote the general Welfare* , and *secure the
Blessings of Liberty* to ourselves and our *Posterity* , do ordain and
establish this Constitution for the United States of America.''
They wrote "more perfect" not *perfect* , so the fact that there are
poor was taken into consideration.
Taking money at gun point and giving it to the few, doesn't sound like
it will "promote the general welfare" it sounds like forcing someone
else to pay for their neighbor to live. "Promote" has a *connotation*
of *encourage* and that is not the same as sticking a *gun in my face*
and hauling me to prison for not "promoting" my neighbors preferred
life style.
Poetic Justice
The commitment is to promote the general welfare of all persons, as
opposed to protecting the interests of a narrow section or class of the
population.
HarryNadds
Worked for Kennedy and Reagan.Bush made the mistake of trying to be a
"compassionate conservative" and get along with the kooks on the left
by spending like a drunk sailor in a cathouse.It did'nt work and just
pissed off his base.His tax cuts actually increased revenue to the
gubmint.Works every time if you also cut spending.From what I'm
hearing from both democrat moonbat candidates they'll not only spend
as much as Bush but double or triple it.Better hold on to your hats
because here it comes.
HarryNadds
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
When the sick and poor start hiring people and building things I'll
say fuck the corporations and confiscate ALL their income.Wait,thats
what Hillary and Buckwheat are saying!!
Poetic Justice
They want to take the profits of the corporations, the profits don't
belong to the corporations, they belong to the stockholders and guess
who that is?
It's average workers.... people with an IRA or 401K invested in the
market... you get the profit in your retirement account. But if the
Democrats steal that profit then it will never make it to your
retirement account, the Liberals want to raid your retirement before you
get the money, just as they now raid your paycheck for taxes before you
get your pay.
Lloyd
> On Apr 21, 9:42 am, Phil Hays <inva...@dont.spam> wrote:
>
> > HarryNadds wrote:
> > > According to liberals if there's a problem raise taxes and
> > > throw money at it.
>
> > According to republicans, if there is a problem, cut taxes and throw money
> > at it.
>
> Worked for Kennedy and Reagan.
Reagan signed one of the biggest tax increases in history:
"The following year, Reagan made one of the greatest ideological about-
faces in the history of the presidency, agreeing to a $165 billion
bailout of Social Security. In almost every way, the bailout flew in
the face of conservative ideology. It dramatically increased payroll
taxes on employees and employers, brought a whole new class of
recipients--new federal workers--into the system, and, for the first
time, taxed Social Security benefits, and did so in the most liberal
way: only those of upper-income recipients. (As an added affront to
conservatives, the tax wasn't indexed to inflation, meaning that more
and more people have gradually had to pay it over time.)"
>Bush made the mistake of trying to be a
> "compassionate conservative" and get along with the kooks on the left
> by spending like a drunk sailor in a cathouse.
Uh, which party controlled both Congress and the presidency?
>It did'nt work and just
> pissed off his base.His tax cuts actually increased revenue to the
> gubmint.
Actually tax revenue increases pretty much every year, unless you're
in a recession. Some of the biggest growth occurred under Clinton,
leading to the budget surplus.
>Works every time if you also cut spending.From what I'm
> hearing from both democrat moonbat candidates they'll not only spend
> as much as Bush but double or triple it.
Which one will spend a trillion dollars on a war in Iraq?
Kevin Cunningham
So tell us, how did liberals alone make billions for defense
contractors? How did liberals make billions for oil companies? Seems
like Poetic Baby has some problems with the facts.
Lloyd
But corporations want the right to free speech -- they demand to be
treated like human beings. So why shouldn't they be taxed?
> It's average workers.... people with an IRA or 401K invested in the
> market... you get the profit in your retirement account.
And have to pay more in taxes because corporations are paying less.
"According to OMB historical data, corporate taxes averaged 2 percent
of GDP in the 1990s. That represented only about two-fifths of their
share of GDP in the 1950s, half of their share in the 1960s, and three-
quarters of their share in the 1970s."
And corporations were doing quite well back in the 50s and 60s.
>But if the
> Democrats steal that profit then it will never make it to your
> retirement account, the Liberals want to raid your retirement before you
> get the money, just as they now raid your paycheck for taxes before you
> get your pay.
Again, if corporations don't pay taxes, you will make up the
difference. There ain't no free ride.
ayatollah obama
>
> - Show quoted text -
Corporations have *never* paid income taxes. The price you pay for the
product includes the direct and indirect cost of the goods, and
expected state/federal taxes, and OMFG.... profit
Poetic Justice
> On Apr 21, 3:47 pm, Lloyd <lpar...@emory.edu> wrote:
>> On Apr 21, 3:31 pm, Poetic Justice <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Dog.com> wrote:
>>> HarryNadds wrote:
>>>> On Apr 21, 11:14 am, SgtMinor <Sa...@the.old.folks.home.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> HarryNadds wrote:
>>>>>> On Apr 21, 2:53 am, "V-for-Vendicar"
>>>>>> <Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> "Phil Hays" <inva...@dont.spam> wrote
>>>>>>>> Is there any problem to which republicans don't think that cutting taxes
>>>>>>>> is the solution?
>>>>>>> 11 trillion dollars of Borrow and Spend RepubliKKKanism.
Corporate income tax is nothing but a hidden sales tax on on it's customers.
Poetic Justice
Liberals in congress spend the money, look at Liberal Harry Reid, his
state has plenty of DOD money getting to it. Liberals started the
Global warming panic and the resulting high priced oil is making Exxon rich.
I didn't say "alone" you did. But I will say Liberals are the driving
force.
HarryNadds
>
> - Show quoted text -
Good luck.You ever see a liberal take responsibilty for anything they
see as bad?? They always blame the adults.
Phil Hays
> That's the Bush Doctrine, but he's Bi-Polar. Bush is a Liberal on
> spending and a conservative on taxes, that combibation is like a MUTANT
> REPUBLICRAT that will crush an economy with a single spending bill,
> there is no spending he will VETO and no tax he will support.... These
> Mutants are the most danger to the USA on the planet.
>
>
> He grew up a REPUBLICAN and is fighting to be a Democrat, Bigger more
> costly government schools and elderly prescriptions for free..... That
> is the Democrat fighting his way to the surface. NO, Bush is no Reagan.
Reagan presided over the largest federal government spending as a fraction
of GDP since WW2.
While he talked a good game, Reagan was no St. Reagan either.
Bill Clinton, on the other hand, reduced federal government spending to
the smallest fraction of GDP since 1974.
What didn't you like again? Peace, prosperity, or smaller government?
Bitter Buttock Obomber's terrorist friend William Ayers
And now, the enviro-nazis created uber-high food prices. Will they
ever face the guilt over the starving riots that they created?
Poetic Justice
Back to semantics....
Clinton cut Military(thanks to Reagan's peace dividend)
That one thing cut "government spending" and helped balance the Clinton
budget.
Peace? ...was the WTC being bombed and then attacking with cruise
missiles and attacking Saddam in Operation Desert Fox launched at 10
p.m. London time peace too....
ayatollah obama
> have an effect on beer but not a one to one effect.
Unless there is an artifical constraint or support, everything stays
relative to the other over time.
In the case of constraint, there is a shortage and the only place you
can find the product is on the black market at the *real* market
value.
Window Licking
Bush 41 had almost 500,000 troops to fight gulf war 1, and bush 43 can't
muster 200,000 to go into Iraq, where did the 300,000 or 60% of our
troops and their bases go?
Only Clinton was between the two wars.
Al Bedo
BC had the benefit of presiding over divided government
which does ( at least did ) curtail spending/tax cuts.
Divided guv is probably the key.
> What didn't you like again? Peace, prosperity, or smaller government?
The peace and prosperity were illusory.
WTC 1, Khobar towers, African Embassies, USS Cole, millenial plot,
and the planning of 9/11.
- we were at war, but didn't know it.
Similarly, much of the deficit reduction was from capital gains tax
of the .com run up which let us down with .bomb
Pets.com anyone?
SgtMinor
Are you saying that people who promoted biofuels wanted food to be taken
from other people's mouths so that they could fill their gas tanks?
You don't not shit about biofuels, do you?
V-for-Vendicar
> 11 trillion dollars of Borrow and Spend RepubliKKKanism.
>
> AmeriKKKa is bankrupt morally, intellectually, and economically.
"HarryNadds" <hoofhe...@yahoo.com> wrote
> Over 6 trillion wasted on the "war on poverty"
Aren't the poorest AmeriKKKans better off than the richest people in third
world countries? Isn't that the popular retort by KKKonsrevatives wishing
to downplay AmeriKKKan poverty?
So if AmeriKKKa's poor are so well off by KKKonservative reasoning, then
the war on poverty must have worked very well indeed.
"HarryNadds" <hoofhe...@yahoo.com> wrote
>.According the the kook libs we have more people in poverty now than ever.
According to the KKKook KKKonservatives there is no poverty in AmeriKKKa.
"HarryNadds" <hoofhe...@yahoo.com> wrote
> More trillions wasted on public education.
Ya, children don't need an education. And according to your Libertarian
Brothers, children should be on the streets pimping themselves. Especially
the little girls.
"HarryNadds" <hoofhe...@yahoo.com> wrote
> Kids graduating from high school that can't read or do simple math.
Too busy dodging bullets.
Isn't that a first year course in AmeriKKKan high school? Bullet dodging
101?
How to marry a Crack whore 101 and 102 are the most instructive though.
AmeriKKKa is a toilet. Thanks for the remindere KKKonservative Nadds.
V-for-Vendicar
> How many Billion in AmeriKKKan dollars did Bush fly secretly to Iraq on
> crates, only to have the money disappear on him? 20 billion? 30 billion.
>
> Ahahahahahaha... Complete incompetence.
"HarryNadds" <hoofhe...@yahoo.com> wrote
> You have proof or was that from MOVEON.org??
We only have the eye witness accounts of the soldiers who flew it in,
moved it, and watched Iraqi officials drive off with the truckload after
truckload of fresh AmeriKKKan cash.
Of course that was before the AmeriKKKan dollar went into the toilet - As
I predicted months earlier.
V-for-Vendicar
"ayatollah obama" <osama.obabm...@gmail.com> wrote
> Sometimes I am just f'n floored by how you DemonCraps think. Double
> price of fuel and the price of everthing else doubles, that's basic
> free market theory.
Well, well, back in the mid 1980's oil was $10 a barrel now it's 117. So
has the price of everything increased by a factor of 11.7 over that time
period?
Ahahahahahaahah........ KKKonservative MORONS.
Phil Hays
> BC had the benefit of presiding over divided government which does ( at
> least did ) curtail spending/tax cuts.
>
> Divided guv is probably the key.
Didn't seem to help Reagan much, now did it.
>> What didn't you like again? Peace, prosperity, or smaller government?
>
> The peace and prosperity were illusory.
>
> WTC 1, Khobar towers, African Embassies, USS Cole, millenial plot, and
> the planning of 9/11.
>
> - we were at war, but didn't know it.
Funny, you didn't mention Oklahoma city. Why not? Do homegrown nutcases
not count as much as foreign ones?
Do a few loose nuts make a war? If that is the case, we have always and
will always be "at war". Kiss your freedoms goodbye.
> Similarly, much of the deficit reduction was from capital gains tax of
> the .com run up which let us down with .bomb
Capital gains taxes as a percentage of income taxes was 11% under Reagan
in 1986 and 1987. Compare with 11% in 1999, and 12% in 2000. Income taxes
are about half of federal government revenue. So why again did Reagan run
up such huge deficits?
But hey, why not make wearing a flag on the suit lapel the key issue of
the day, and let the kids pay for it all.
With interest.
V-for-Vendicar
"ayatollah obama" <osama.obabm...@gmail.com> wrote
> You have to cook stuff to make beer.... *energy* dumbass.
> You have to ship it.... *energy* dumbass
Energy is only one component of the cost in making a product. Other costs
include raw materials, labour, design, production losses, shipping losses,
retailing losses, etc.
Certainly energy is a big component of production costs, but it's not a 1
to 1 relationship, and for you to claim it is, shows your complete ignorance
of commerce.
But then you are a KKKonservative
MMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRROOOOOOOONNNNNN
So your ignornace is expected.
V-for-Vendicar
"Phil Hays" <inv...@dont.spam> wrote
> According to republicans, if there is a problem, cut taxes and throw money
> at it.
Oh come on now... It worked with Katrina didn't it?
V-for-Vendicar
"Poetic Justice" <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote
> That's the Bush Doctrine, but he's Bi-Polar. Bush is a Liberal on spending
> and a conservative on taxes,
And he was supported 100% by the RepubliKKKans in congress.
All of them must be Bi-Polar as well. And the same in the pervious Bush
administration, and in the Reagan administration as well, when Reagan's
borrow and spend policies started AmeriKKKa on the road to the Slaughter
House.
"Poetic Justice" <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote
> NO, Bush is no Reagan.
You are right. Your president is dumber than a man with Alzhimers.
So why did the KKKonservative KKKongress give him everthing he demanded?
Are they Dumber than shit too?
V-for-Vendicar
"Phil Hays" <inv...@dont.spam> wrote
> What didn't you like again? Peace, prosperity, or smaller government?
Well AmeriKKKa got all three with Clinton.
"But he got a blow job." the Jealous KKKonservatives whine.
V-for-Vendicar
No, KKKonservatives in KKKongress cut the military.
MMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNN
V-for-Vendicar
"Window Licking" <Moron.With.A.Computer@Talk-n-Dog..com> wrote
> Bush 41 had almost 500,000 troops to fight gulf war 1, and bush 43 can't
> muster 200,000 to go into Iraq, where did the 300,000 or 60% of our troops
> and their bases go?
Apperntly they went gay.
Phil Hays
> Bush 41 had almost 500,000 troops to fight gulf war 1, and bush 43 can't
> muster 200,000 to go into Iraq, where did the 300,000 or 60% of our
> troops and their bases go?
Gulf War 1 was a go kick ass then come home, war.
The quagmire in Iraq is a rotate in for a year, rotate out for a year. A
swamp.
Kicking ass and taking names, you can send almost the whole force.
Quagmires, half the force is at home, getting ready for the next lovely
dip in the glorious swamp.
SgtMinor
> On Apr 21, 5:49 am, "V-for-Vendicar"
> <Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:
>> <monkey_cartm...@yahoo.com> wrote
>>
>>> Democrats use taxes to pay for things, Republicans have always gotten
>>> a free ride by accusing the Democrats of.
>>> being the big tax spenders, while they sit back doing nothing very
>>> useful while demanding massive amounts our tax money to be pissed away
>>> in Iraq so they can feel like patriots.
>> How many Billion in AmeriKKKan dollars did Bush fly secretly to Iraq on
>> crates, only to have the money disappear on him? 20 billion? 30 billion.
>>
>> Ahahahahahaha... Complete incompetence.
>
Here's a quote:
" Money also disappeared in truckloads and by helicopter. The CPA
reportedly distributed funds to contractors in bags off the back of a
truck. In one notorious incident in April 2004, $1.5 billion in cash
that had just been delivered by three Blackhawk helicopters was handed
over to a courier in Erbil, in the Kurdish region, never to be seen
again. Afterwards, no one was able to recall the courier’s name or
provide a good description of him."
From The American Conservative, "Money for Nothing
Billions of dollars have disappeared, gone to bribe Iraqis and line
contractors’ pockets."
http://www.amconmag.com/2005/2005_10_24/cover.html
Or this from ABC News:
"Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif, chairman of the House Government Reform &
Oversight Committee summoned Bremer, citing a January 2005 audit report
from Stuart W. Bowen, the government's special inspector general for
Iraq reconstruction, which concluded that Bremer's CPA failed to account
for $8.8 billion given to Iraqi ministries.
Democrats on the committee painted a picture of disorganization within
the Bush administration after the fall of Saddam Hussein. In his opening
statement, Rep. Waxman claimed $12 billion dollars were sent to Iraq
between May 2003 and June 2004 and is unaccounted for by the U.S.
government.
Rep. Waxman said that 'bags of money' were taken from the Federal
Reserve in New York, loaded onto wooden palettes and put on cargo planes
that were flown into Baghdad.
"Who in their right minds would send 360 tons of cash into a war zone?"
asked Rep. Waxman. "But that's exactly what our government did," he said.
V-for-Vendicar
"HarryNadds" <hoofhe...@yahoo.com> wrote
> Worked for Kennedy and Reagan.Bush made the mistake of trying to be a
> "compassionate conservative" and get along with the kooks on the left
> by spending like a drunk sailor in a cathouse.
Just like his Father and Ronald Reagan before him.
Bush is following the Neo-KKKonservative handbook precisely.
The NeoKKKonservative goal is to bankrupt the U.S. government. To "Starve
the beast" they call it.
Bush said so himself...
"We must manufacture a [economic] crisis in order to assure that there is
no alternative to a smaller government." - Bush - Imprimus Magazine 1995.
V-for-Vendicar
"SgtMinor" <Sa...@the.old.folks.home.invalid> wrote
> Corporations have taken over our government and are gorging themselves at
> the expense of the people.
Who cares? Dancing with the stars is just starting on channel 4.
Besides, All government is evil and all forms of deregulation are good.
That's what Rush tells me.
V-for-Vendicar
> Constitution never intended that government give away money.
Actually it provided for taxation, and the providing of the general
welfare of the state.
"Poetic Justice" <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote
> I go after all welfare
You have been posting here for at least half a year and haven't said
anything about corporate welfare. But have whined about individuals
collecting welfare almost continually.
I conclude that you are therefore a liar.
V-for-Vendicar
> Is just not broad enough, to be construed as the legal right to steal from
> citizens at gun point because you want to.
No one is stealing from you at gunpoint - except you Neighbourhood mugger
of course. AmeriKKKa is infested with those KKKonservative KKKretins.
The U.S. constitution provides for the collection of taxes.
It's a simple matter. Pay your taxes or get out.
If you don't want to pay them then leave. If you stay, you are in
violation of the constitutionally provided law, and you will go to jail, as
also provided in the U.S. constitution.
Not recognizing this makes you a ....
MMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOONNNNNNN
"Poetic Justice" <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote
> yes I have a problem with the government "giving" money.
Odd that you have never complianed about the hundreds of billions being
given out in Iraq. In one instance - 30 billion in cash flown in on skids
and whisked out of sight by unmarked Iraqi trucks.
"Poetic Justice" <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote
> Taking money at gun point and giving it to the few, doesn't sound like it
> will "promote the general welfare" it sounds like forcing someone else to
> pay for their neighbor to live.
No one is stealing from you at gunpoint - except you Neighbourhood mugger
of course. AmeriKKKa is infested with those KKKonservative KKKretins..
The U.S. constitution provides for the collection of taxes.
It's a simple matter. Pay your taxes or get out.
If you don't want to pay them then leave. If you stay, you are in
violation of the constitutionally provided law, and you will go to jail, as
also provided in the U.S. constitution.
Not recognizing this makes you a ....
MMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOONNNNNNN
V-for-Vendicar
> opposed to protecting the interests of a narrow section or class of the
> population.
Corporations are persons. And like the wealthy, they are richer than you
so they are better than you and they are more valuable than you.
Compared to a Corporate person you are dirt.
And that's the basis of NeoKKKonservatism.
V-for-Vendicar
"Kevin Cunningham" <sms...@mindspring.com> wrote
> So tell us, how did liberals alone make billions for defense
> contractors? How did liberals make billions for oil companies? Seems
> like Poetic Baby has some problems with the facts.
I first encountered his kind back in the early 1980's. I found a group of
his clones calling for the murder of all government workers (any government
worker), in retribution for the theft of their life (their murder) through
taxation.
They were very happy indeed when Timothy McVeigh blew up the Murraih
Government building near Waco, and they called for more such acts in their
patirot "revolution" against the Fascist AmeriKKKan State.
I've done some follow up on these guys over the last 20 years, and 3 of
them have served prison time, One for murdering a police officer, another
for threatening to murder a police officer, and one for just for petty
crimes. One was accused of beating his wife - but as a Judge he managed to
pull some strings and had the charges against him dropped by the prosecutor.
They were all KKKonservative Losers of course, One boasted that he had
sued his various land lords various times and was about to proceed again
because his current one had failed to fix a light switch sufficiently fast
enough for him.
They referred to themselves as "Free thinkers" "Educated Conservatives",
"Freemen" and "Patriot Libertarians."
They received quite a lot of support from regular AmeriKKKan
KKKonservatives who would pop in and out of the group. Matt Giwer (well
known net K00K) figured prominentlym and another who's name I don't remember
who's Libertarian Idealism led him to believe that he had the right to
murder Law Enforcement Officers because they were agents of an Illegal
state.
25 years later and with AmeriKKKa now destroyed by their KKKonservative
poison, AmeriKKKan KKKonservatives continue to inject their poison.
So long AmeriKKKa... It was nice knowing you....
V-for-Vendicar
Through Virtually all of Bush's failed Presidency RepubliKKKans have
controlled the congress.
And failing to realize that makes you a.....
MMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNN
Al Bedo
>>> What didn't you like again? Peace, prosperity, or smaller government?
>> The peace and prosperity were illusory.
>>
>> WTC 1, Khobar towers, African Embassies, USS Cole, millenial plot, and
>> the planning of 9/11.
>>
>> - we were at war, but didn't know it.
>
> Funny, you didn't mention Oklahoma city. Why not? Do homegrown nutcases
> not count as much as foreign ones?
That's not the point. Throw him in if you want.
The point is we were not at 'peace'.
>
> Do a few loose nuts make a war? If that is the case, we have always and
> will always be "at war". Kiss your freedoms goodbye.
Concern for freedom is a fair point, and one I share.
Liberty is, of course, this nation's founding principal.
However, strangely, that liberty is in part dependent on government maintaining it.
(Civil rights might not have prevailed had not federal troops been deployed to
the South). And it is the government which is the target of al Qaida.
What if the high-jackers of Flight 93 had succeeded?
Without a Congressional succession plan, what kind of meltdowns might have happened?
I agree that there is an internal threat ( the fire in the Reichstag ).
But the scope of the external threat is much greater than 'a few loose nuts' implies.
Given the ease with which bin Laden recruited the muscle for 9/11,
he evidently doesn't need much of an advertising budget.
Al Bedo
>> Similarly, much of the deficit reduction was from capital gains tax of
>> the .com run up which let us down with .bomb
>
> Capital gains taxes as a percentage of income taxes was 11% under Reagan
> in 1986 and 1987. Compare with 11% in 1999, and 12% in 2000. Income taxes
> are about half of federal government revenue. So why again did Reagan run
> up such huge deficits?
I didn't refer to any of that.
The deficit REDUCTION of the 1990s was in large part aided by an
INCREASE in revenue from the capital gains tax - NOT because of the
capital gains tax RATE, but because of the level of gains earned
from the .com run up.
Once the .com bubble burst, this revenue quite suddenly vanished.
Al Bedo
> But hey, why not make wearing a flag on the suit lapel the key issue of
> the day, and let the kids pay for it all.
>
> With interest.
You and I agree - deficits are taxation on unrepresented future citizens.
As such they are un Constitutional.
But as long as we have Santa Claus elections (both parties with
expensive gifts in exchange for votes) - we're screwed.
You want to blame Republicans.
I want to blame the voters - not just Rs - ALL voters
whose representatives of each party carry out their greedy wishes.
Poetic Justice
Pick the politicians that are the biggest violators and crucify them.
The rest will fall in line, that's their process to deal with taxpayers.
They have the IRS pick the biggest offenders and they make very public
their legal financial destruction.
HarryNadds
Dog..com> wrote:
> Poetic Justice wrote:
> > Phil Hays wrote:
> >> Talk-n-Dog wrote:
>
> >>> That's the Bush Doctrine, but he's Bi-Polar. Bush is a Liberal on
> >>> REPUBLICRAT that will crush an economy with a single spending bill,
> >>> there is no spending he will VETO and no tax he will support.... These
> >>> Mutants are the most danger to the USA on the planet.
>
> >>> He grew up a REPUBLICAN and is fighting to be a Democrat, Bigger more
> >>> costly government schools and elderly prescriptions for free..... That
> >>> is the Democrat fighting his way to the surface. NO, Bush is no Reagan.
>
> >> Reagan presided over the largest federal government spending as a
> >> fraction
> >> of GDP since WW2.
>
> >> While he talked a good game, Reagan was no St. Reagan either.
>
> >> Bill Clinton, on the other hand, reduced federal government spending to
> >> the smallest fraction of GDP since 1974.
>
>
>
> > Clinton cut Military(thanks to Reagan's peace dividend)
>
> > budget.
>
> > Peace? ...was the WTC being bombed and then attacking with cruise
> > missiles and attacking Saddam in Operation Desert Fox launched at 10
> > p.m. London time peace too....
>
> Bush 41 had almost 500,000 troops to fight gulf war 1, and bush 43 can't
> muster 200,000 to go into Iraq, where did the 300,000 or 60% of our
> troops and their bases go?
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Clinton(s) were at war but did'nt have the cojones to fight back.He
(they) was too concerned about his (their) legacy so he (they) waited
till an adult took office.
ayatollah obama
>
> - Show quoted text -
Or, part of the $100+ million were part of the kickbacks for doing
nothing.
-------
DemonCraps.... Making the lives of poor people even more miserable!
Poetic Justice
And you have to remember Bush is a MORON according to Liberals, so just
imagine what the greatest liar known to American politics could have
done in eight years?
Clinton who was marveled at being so slick by Liberals must have done
better than Bush. You just need to find it.
Poetic Justice
Poetic Justice
> Bitter Buttock Obomber's terrorist friend William Ayers wrote:
>> On Apr 21, 12:07 pm, Tunderbar <tdcom...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Apr 20, 7:35 pm, SgtMinor <Sa...@the.old.folks.home.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Harry F. Dope wrote:
>>>>> Biofuels under attack as world food prices soar
>>>>> Sun Apr 20, 5:36 AM ET
>>>>> PARIS (AFP) - Hailed until only months ago as a silver bullet in
>>>>> the fight
>>>>> against global warming, biofuels are now accused of snatching food
>>>>> out of
>>>>> the mouths of the poor.
>>>> Another straw man knocked down. Silver bullet, my ass.
>>>> Any article that starts off with such a nonsensical premise cannot be
>>>> taken seriously. There may have been some blithering idiots who argued
>>>> that biofuels would be the answer, but anyone who has paid attention to
>>>> this industry knows that there have been doubts about the concept from
>>>> the beginning.
>>> But it did not stop the enviro-nutbars from promoting the "green" bio-
>>> fuel, did it?
>>
>> And now, the enviro-nazis created uber-high food prices. Will they
>> ever face the guilt over the starving riots that they created?
>>
>
> Are you saying that people who promoted biofuels wanted food to be taken
> from other people's mouths so that they could fill their gas tanks?
NO.... they're just stupid.
HarryNadds
>
> - Show quoted text -
If the Clinton's were the second coming of Christ then she/they should
be a shoe in.We could be in another 8 years of utopia if she /they get
elected.Prollum is,only a few liberal moonbats actually convinced
themselves that the 90's were'nt a total embarassment for the US.
monkey_...@yahoo.com
V-for-Vendicar wrote:
> <monkey_...@yahoo.com> wrote
> > Democrats use taxes to pay for things, Republicans have always gotten
> > a free ride by accusing the Democrats of.
> > being the big tax spenders, while they sit back doing nothing very
> > useful while demanding massive amounts our tax money to be pissed away
> > in Iraq so they can feel like patriots.
>
> How many Billion in AmeriKKKan dollars did Bush fly secretly to Iraq on
> crates, only to have the money disappear on him? 20 billion? 30 billion.
>
> Ahahahahahaha... Complete incompetence.
I think it's deliberate incompetence. Either that or right-wingers are
complete idiots, or both.
monkey_...@yahoo.com
HarryNadds wrote:
> On Apr 21, 5:49�am, "V-for-Vendicar"
> <Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:
> > <monkey_cartm...@yahoo.com> wrote
> >
> > > Democrats use taxes to pay for things, Republicans have always gotten
> > > a free ride by accusing the Democrats of.
> > > being the big tax spenders, while they sit back doing nothing very
> > > useful while demanding massive amounts our tax money to be pissed away
> > > in Iraq so they can feel like patriots.
> >
> > � How many Billion in AmeriKKKan dollars did Bush fly secretly to Iraq on
> > crates, only to have the money disappear on him? �20 billion? 30 billion.
> >
> > � Ahahahahahaha... Complete incompetence.
>
> You have proof or was that from MOVEON.org??
Isn't that somple common knowledge?? Like Bush and it's supporters are
total idiots
monkey_...@yahoo.com
Phil Hays wrote:
> HarryNadds wrote:
>
> > According to liberals if there's a problem raise taxes and
> > throw money at it.
>
> According to republicans, if there is a problem, cut taxes and throw money
> at it.
Apparently the Democrats don't completely have it down, but
Republicans aren't even remotely close and do damage to the country to
top it off..
monkey_...@yahoo.com
Tunderbar wrote:
> On Apr 20, 7:35�pm, SgtMinor <Sa...@the.old.folks.home.invalid> wrote:
> > Harry F. Dope wrote:
> > > Biofuels under attack as world food prices soar
> > > Sun Apr 20, 5:36 AM ET
> > > PARIS (AFP) - Hailed until only months ago as a silver bullet in the fight
> > > against global warming, biofuels are now accused of snatching food out of
> > > the mouths of the poor.
> >
> > Another straw man knocked down. �Silver bullet, my ass.
> >
> > Any article that starts off with such a nonsensical premise cannot be
> > taken seriously. �There may have been some blithering idiots who argued
> > that biofuels would be the answer, but anyone who has paid attention to
> > this industry knows that there have been doubts about the concept from
> > the beginning.
>
> But it did not stop the enviro-nutbars from promoting the "green" bio-
> fuel, did it?
Nor did it stop BUSH from going to South America to sell it before we
even remotely have a sound plan for it for our country.
monkey_...@yahoo.com
Poetic Justice wrote:
> Phil Hays wrote:
> > HarryNadds wrote:
> >
> >> According to liberals if there's a problem raise taxes and
> >> throw money at it.
> >
> > According to republicans, if there is a problem, cut taxes and throw money
> > at it.
>
>
> That's the Bush Doctrine, but he's Bi-Polar. Bush is a Liberal on
> spending and a conservative on taxes, that combibation is like a MUTANT
> REPUBLICRAT that will crush an economy with a single spending bill,
> there is no spending he will VETO and no tax he will support.... These
> Mutants are the most danger to the USA on the planet.
>
>
> He grew up a REPUBLICAN and is fighting to be a Democrat, Bigger more
> costly government schools and elderly prescriptions for free..... That
> is the Democrat fighting his way to the surface. NO, Bush is no Reagan.
And we all though Reagan totally fucking sucked
monkey_...@yahoo.com
SgtMinor wrote:
> HarryNadds wrote:
> > On Apr 21, 2:53 am, "V-for-Vendicar"
> > <Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:
> >> "Phil Hays" <inva...@dont.spam> wrote
> >>
> >>> Is there any problem to which republicans don't think that cutting taxes
> >>> is the solution?
> >> 11 trillion dollars of Borrow and Spend RepubliKKKanism.
> >>
> >> AmeriKKKa is bankrupt morally, intellectually, and economically.
> >
> > Over 6 trillion wasted on the "war on poverty".According the the kook
> > libs we have more people in poverty now than ever.More trillions
> > wasted on public education.Kids graduating from high school that can't
> > read or do simple math.According to liberals if there's a problem
> > raise taxes and throw money at it.
>
Long since the time when we started to find that the wallmart
"everything is made in the USA" was actually mostly made in China.
> Taking care of the hungry, the sick, and the poor doesn't seem like such
> a bad thing for a society to do. Shoveling trillions of dollars at big
> business in the form or corporate welfare is an entirely different
> issue. If you are truly concerned about the waste of your tax money, go
> after corporate welfare. Corporations have taken over our government
V-for-Vendicar
"Tunderbar" <tdco...@gmail.com> wrote
> But it did not stop the enviro-nutbars from promoting the "green" bio-
> fuel, did it?
The Greens don't control how it is produced. But they soon will.
April 22, 2008, MCT News Service
WASHINGTON - Americans won't pay huge new electricity and heating
bills, unemployment won't skyrocket and the U.S. economy won't be
damaged in the decades ahead if Congress passes legislation to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, according to a study released yesterday.
The Environmental Defense Fund, an advocacy group that supports a
mandatory cap and a substantial reduction of emissions, conducted the
study by examining a range of peer-reviewed economic models from five
academic and government groups. The models looked at the costs of
emissions-slashing proposals that are at least as tough as the one the
Senate will debate in June.
That measure, sponsored by Sens. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., and John
Warner, R-Va., would cut greenhouse gas emissions by about 60 percent
below 2005 levels by 2050. It sets up a "cap and trade" plan in which
the government would give or sell allowances to pollute, reducing the
overall amount each year. Companies could buy or sell the allowances,
or they could save them to use in later years.
There have been wildly different estimates of the cost of the
legislation. Studies that hide their assumptions or make assumptions
that skew the results are "a dime a dozen," said Peter Goldmark,
director of the Environmental Defense Fund's climate program.
Now that they have lost the debate on the science of global warming,
Goldmark said, opponents of a cap on greenhouse gases have shifted
gears and are spending millions to try to "scare the public into
thinking this will put scads of people out of work and damage the
economy."
Goldmark and economist Nathaniel Keohane, the director of the group's
economic policy analysis section, examined models produced by the
Energy Information Agency, the Research Triangle Institute, Harvard
University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Pacific
Northwest National Laboratories.
The bottom line, they found, is that the United States could continue
its economic growth over the next decades while making "ambitious
reductions" in greenhouse gas emissions.
[ . . . ]
V-for-Vendicar
"Bitter Buttock Obomber's terrorist friend William Ayers"
> And now, the enviro-nazis created uber-high food prices. Will they
> ever face the guilt over the starving riots that they created?
Sorry, high food prices are caused by high oil prices.
PERIOD.
V-for-Vendicar
"SgtMinor" <Sa...@the.old.folks.home.invalid> wrote
> Are you saying that people who promoted biofuels wanted food to be taken
> from other people's mouths so that they could fill their gas tanks?
Yup, that's what he is saying..
V-for-Vendicar
>> Are you saying that people who promoted biofuels wanted food to be taken
>> from other people's mouths so that they could fill their gas tanks?
"Poetic Justice" <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote
> NO.... they're just stupid.
Yup, KKKonservatives are the dumbest people in existance.
Extermination is called for.
monkey_...@yahoo.com
Lloyd wrote:
> On Apr 21, 1:34 pm, Poetic Justice <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-
> Dog.com> wrote:
> > SgtMinor wrote:
> > > HarryNadds wrote:
> > >> On Apr 21, 2:53 am, "V-for-Vendicar"
> > >> <Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:
> > >>> "Phil Hays" <inva...@dont.spam> wrote
> >
> > >>>> Is there any problem to which republicans don't think that cutting
> > >>>> taxes
> > >>>> is the solution?
> > >>> 11 trillion dollars of Borrow and Spend RepubliKKKanism.
> >
> > >>> AmeriKKKa is bankrupt morally, intellectually, and economically.
> >
> > >> Over 6 trillion wasted on the "war on poverty".According the the kook
> > >> libs we have more people in poverty now than ever.More trillions
> > >> wasted on public education.Kids graduating from high school that can't
> > >> read or do simple math.According to liberals if there's a problem
> > >> raise taxes and throw money at it.
> >
> > > Taking care of the hungry, the sick, and the poor doesn't seem like such
> > > a bad thing for a society to do. Shoveling trillions of dollars at big
> > > business in the form or corporate welfare is an entirely different
> >
> > If you open the door, there is no telling where it leads. The
> > Constitution never intended that government give away money.
>
> "provide for the general welfare" is pretty broad. And do you have a
> problem giving money away to Iraq?
>
> >Once
> > Liberals opened that door they doomed us to the unintended consequences.
> >
> > > issue. If you are truly concerned about the waste of your tax money, go
> > > after corporate welfare. Corporations have taken over our government
> > > and are gorging themselves at the expense of the people.
> >
> > Liberals have taken over and their Ideology is flawed. It's like oil and
> > water, capitalism and Liberalism, the result is just a useless mess.
> >
> > I go after all welfare, any money government takes at gun point should
> > go to infrastructure to make the taxpayers life better, by better I mean
> > better within the parameters of what the constitution directs the
> > government is permitted legally to do.
>
> Like "provide for the general welfare" and "make all laws necessary
> and proper" -- the writers wrote in general terms on purpose.
The preamble to the US Constitution
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect
Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the
common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the
Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and
establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
V-for-Vendicar
<monkey_...@yahoo.com> wrote
> And we all though Reagan totally fucking sucked
Reagan was the first president who suffered from Alzheimers while in
office. That alone kept him from being impeached for Iran/Contra
Corruption.
Georgie Bush is the first AmeriKKKan president to be a low grade MORON.
Clinton on the other hand was a Rhodes Scholar.
V-for-Vendicar
And that's how we count to Dysmal Failure, little children.
monkey_...@yahoo.com
HarryNadds wrote:
> On Apr 21, 6:05�pm, Poetic Justice <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-
> Dog.com> wrote:
> > Kevin Cunningham wrote:
> > > On Apr 21, 1:34 pm, Poetic Justice <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-
> > > Dog.com> wrote:
> > >> SgtMinor wrote:
> > >>> HarryNadds wrote:
> > >>>> On Apr 21, 2:53 am, "V-for-Vendicar"
> > >>>> <Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:
> > >>>>> "Phil Hays" <inva...@dont.spam> wrote
> > >>>>>> Is there any problem to which republicans don't think that cutting
> > >>>>>> taxes
> > >>>>>> is the solution?
> > >>>>> � 11 trillion dollars of Borrow and Spend RepubliKKKanism.
> > >>>>> � AmeriKKKa is bankrupt morally, intellectually, and economically.
> > >>>> Over 6 trillion wasted on the "war on poverty".According the the kook
> > >>>> libs we have more people in poverty now than ever.More trillions
> > >>>> wasted on public education.Kids graduating from high school that can't
> > >>>> read or do simple math.According to liberals if there's a problem
> > >>>> raise taxes and throw money at it.
> > >>> Taking care of the hungry, the sick, and the poor doesn't seem like such
> > >>> a bad thing for a society to do. �Shoveling trillions of dollars at big
> > >>> business in the form or corporate welfare is an entirely different
> > >> If you open the door, there is no telling where it leads. �The
> > >> Constitution never intended that government give away money. �Once
> > >> Liberals opened that door they doomed us to the unintended consequences.
> >
> > >>> issue. �If you are truly concerned about the waste of your tax money, go
> > >>> after corporate welfare. �Corporations have taken over our government
> > >>> and are gorging themselves at the expense of the people.
> > >> Liberals have taken over and their Ideology is flawed. It's like oil and
> > >> water, capitalism and Liberalism, the result is just a useless mess.
> >
> > >> I go after all welfare, any money government takes at gun point should
> > >> go to infrastructure to make the taxpayers life better, by better I mean
> > >> better within the parameters of what the constitution directs the
> > >> government is permitted legally to do. No where does the constitution
> > >> allow for redistribution of private wealth.
> >
> > > So tell us, how did liberals alone make billions for defense
> > > contractors? �How did liberals make billions for oil companies? �Seems
> > > like Poetic Baby has some problems with the facts.
> >
> > Liberals in congress spend the money, look at Liberal Harry Reid, his
> > state has plenty of DOD money getting to it. �Liberals started the
> > Global warming panic and the resulting high priced oil is making Exxon rich.
> >
> > I didn't say "alone" �you did. �But I will say Liberals are the driving
> > force.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Good luck.You ever see a liberal take responsibilty for anything they
> see as bad?? They always blame the adults.
Do they not clean up the right-wingers shit after every crappy
Republican presidents and try to fix Republican shit as they
(republicans) are president? I think you people should be apologizing
for have such a worthless piece of shit as president.
V-for-Vendicar
"HarryNadds" <hoofhe...@yahoo.com> wrote
> If the Clinton's were the second coming of Christ then she/they should
> be a shoe in.
Wouldn't the KKKonservatives try to crucify the Clintons like they did
Christ #1?
V-for-Vendicar
> imagine what the greatest liar known to American politics could have done
> in eight years?
Bush hasn't been in the white house 8 yeras....
MMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNN
"Poetic Justice" <@http://Poetic-Justice.Talk-n-Dog.com> wrote
> Clinton who was marveled at being so slick by Liberals must have done
> better than Bush. You just need to find it.
Clinton produced Peace, prosperity, International Respect, Longest period
of Economic Expansion in U.S. history, Balanced Budget.and morality.
Bush has really turned the country around on all those measures.