Quantcast

Rave Party time.... Let's give Grover Norquist a goodbye Rave party... Seems like some Republicans have gotten their senses back... Congratulations....

Contarded Guru Chickenhawk 2012/11/27 03:30:36
Goodbye to you!
Audios MutherF!cker!
Hi ho, hi ho... it's off the grid you go....
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Goodbye Grover.... See ya later... don't let America's door hit you in the back of the arse....

Norquist goodbye good riddence lol

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • MO.gal 2012/11/27 04:31:15
    Hi ho, hi ho... it's off the grid you go....
    MO.gal
    +17
    Bye,Bye, Grover! You won't be missed.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Sissy 2012/11/28 12:27:15
    Goodbye to you!
    Sissy
    +3
    The senators have pretty much made Grover irrelevant, but it needs to be in the House and I haven't seen any numbers other than Rep. King of NY. If there are more, PLEASE let me know, I have thought this guy a dangerous wart on the end of progress for years.
  • Contard... Sissy 2012/11/28 14:55:57
  • A Founding Father 2012/11/28 06:45:05
    Hi ho, hi ho... it's off the grid you go....
    A Founding Father
    +4
    One nutcase gone, 455 more to go this month.
  • Contard... A Found... 2012/11/28 14:58:08
  • SIMPATTYCO 2012/11/28 04:18:42
    Hi ho, hi ho... it's off the grid you go....
    SIMPATTYCO
    +3
    DICTATING TO ELECTED OFFICIALS NOT
  • Mad*Molly SIMPATTYCO 2012/11/28 05:48:46
  • Contard... SIMPATTYCO 2012/11/28 15:00:25
  • David 2012/11/28 03:51:52
    Goodbye to you!
    David
    +3
    Go quickly and go far!
  • Contard... David 2012/11/28 15:00:54
  • Adakin Valorem~PWCM~JLA 2012/11/28 02:13:28 (edited)
    Hi ho, hi ho... it's off the grid you go....
    Adakin Valorem~PWCM~JLA
    +1
    So with Norquist gone and once the celebrating dies down... What's the plan? Assuming the GOP will now compromise with Obama, agreeing to tax the top 2% at the tax rates Obama wants... what is Obama willing to do as far as spending cuts and job creation?

    How will the new higher taxes and added regulations that are to be imposed on January 1 help us with economic growth and job creation?
  • Patent1 Adakin ... 2012/11/28 04:34:42
    Patent1
    +2
    1) The deficit gets paid down. 2) More money becomes available to the middle class, which increases their spending and borrowing power. This creates more demand for goods and services. The increased demand forces businesses to hire more people to fill the increased demand. You see, THERE NEVER WAS A CONNECTION BETWEEN TAXES AND GROWTH. DEMAND FUELS GROWTH.
  • Adakin ... Patent1 2012/11/28 14:01:07 (edited)
    Adakin Valorem~PWCM~JLA
    "1) The deficit gets paid down."

    Please explain that one to me. The CBO says that The Obama Tax on "The Rich" will generate a whopping $85 Billion in NEW annual tax revenue. And during the campaign, Barry promised over $500 Billion in NEW spending programs. Heck, in 2010 he wasted $90 Billion on "Green" Energy jobs where 60% of them went bankrupt as soon as the subsidy disappeared; he lambasted the oil companies over their $2 Billion per year subsidies! That was almost 50 years’ worth of oil subsidies in one wasted shot! And this is the guy that wants to "invest" the money he is taking from successful rich people? I'd rather leave it with the rich since their track record is far better and picking winners. Even Bain Capital had an 80% success rate of picking successful investments.

    If you consider that the CBO also says the CURRENT spending path will give us a $1,100 Billion DEFICIT, please explain to me how the deficit gets paid down with this $85B tax increase. I can't wait to hear that one :-)

    == == ==
    "2) More money becomes available to the middle class, which increases their spending and borrowing power"

    Please explain that one to me also! How does more money become available to the middle class? Where does the money come from? Bernanke’s printing press? Quantita...



    "1) The deficit gets paid down."

    Please explain that one to me. The CBO says that The Obama Tax on "The Rich" will generate a whopping $85 Billion in NEW annual tax revenue. And during the campaign, Barry promised over $500 Billion in NEW spending programs. Heck, in 2010 he wasted $90 Billion on "Green" Energy jobs where 60% of them went bankrupt as soon as the subsidy disappeared; he lambasted the oil companies over their $2 Billion per year subsidies! That was almost 50 years’ worth of oil subsidies in one wasted shot! And this is the guy that wants to "invest" the money he is taking from successful rich people? I'd rather leave it with the rich since their track record is far better and picking winners. Even Bain Capital had an 80% success rate of picking successful investments.

    If you consider that the CBO also says the CURRENT spending path will give us a $1,100 Billion DEFICIT, please explain to me how the deficit gets paid down with this $85B tax increase. I can't wait to hear that one :-)

    == == ==
    "2) More money becomes available to the middle class, which increases their spending and borrowing power"

    Please explain that one to me also! How does more money become available to the middle class? Where does the money come from? Bernanke’s printing press? Quantitative Easing at the rate of printing $45Billion per month out of thin air while diluting the purchasing power of the dollar in your pocket right now? Oh yeah, explain that one to me!

    The CBO also says that the new healthcare law will cost businesses with over 50 employees an average of $1.79 PER HOUR in added costs. They project that many firms with just under 50 workers will cap there employee hiring to the 49 person max so as to limit their exposure to the added H.R. costs. Many other firms will review their lowest skilled and/or least productive employees and decide how to reduce exposure to the new law. As currently scheduled, there are dozens of new taxes and regs in the pipeline that will be imposed across the board come Jan 1, 2012 and it’s not just expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts... it’s a whole bunch of new Obama taxes that have nothing to do with the Bush era. For example, Obamacare has a tiny little item in there that will impose a 3% sales tax when YOU sell your home, And that's just ONE OF THE TAXES that our new HealthCare Tax Law imposes http://www.sodahead.com/unite...

    This ought to be good... I can't wait for you to explain to me how a nation can tax itself into prosperity!
    (more)
  • Contard... Adakin ... 2012/11/28 15:13:56
  • Adakin ... Contard... 2012/11/28 16:37:53
    Adakin Valorem~PWCM~JLA
    Any time Pal... oh, and cute cartoons. Did you get that from the comedy channel or from your favorite news source?
  • Contard... Adakin ... 2012/11/28 17:27:19
  • Patent1 Adakin ... 2012/11/28 19:10:51
    Patent1
    +1
    We already know what bush2, the repugs and teaboogers wasn't working. We tried that experiment for 12 yrs. And the deficit is still growing because of the bush 2 tax cuts. Time to do something different.
  • Adakin ... Patent1 2012/11/29 01:36:18 (edited)
    Adakin Valorem~PWCM~JLA
    Patent1 said: "We tried that experiment for 12 yrs."

    "What 12yr period are you referring to? Bush/Obama?
    == == ==
    Patent1 said: "And the deficit is still growing because of the Bush 2 tax cuts"

    Nope, the DEBT was growing, but the size of the DEFICIT each year was declining up until Jan2007. Then spending was unleashed by the Congress during the final two Bush Years. Here's the details from Obama's OMB:

    Year./Revenue./Spending./Defct.. (in billions of $)
    2001 /$1991.1 /$1862.9 / 128.2
    2002 /$1853.1 /$2010.9 /-157.8 >>> Sept 11/'01 wiped out $2Tril in GDP
    2003 /$1782.3 /$2159.9 /-377.6
    2004 /$1880.1 /$2292.9 /-412.7 >>> Middle IncTax cuts start
    2005 /$2153.6 /$2472.0 /-318.3
    2006 /$2406.9 /$2655.1 /-248.2 >>> Top IncTax Cuts start Dems elected
    2007 /$2568.0 /$2728.7 /-160.7 >>> Record U.S. Treasury Revenue
    2008 /$2524.0 /$2982.5 /-458.6
    2009 /$2105.0 /$3517.7 /-1412.7
    2010 /$2162.7 /$3456.2 /-1293.5
    2011 /$2303.5 /$3603.1 /-1299.6
    2012 (Est)/$2468.6 /$3795.5 /-1326.9

    See for yourself at the WHITEHOUSE's OMB website: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sit...
    == == ==
    Please note the surplus carry-over from the Clinton/Gingrich era budget in 2001, which was eliminated by the 9/11/01 spike which disrupted the economy (destroying over $2T in GDP). Also note the declining deficits...









    &







    Patent1 said: "We tried that experiment for 12 yrs."

    "What 12yr period are you referring to? Bush/Obama?
    == == ==
    Patent1 said: "And the deficit is still growing because of the Bush 2 tax cuts"

    Nope, the DEBT was growing, but the size of the DEFICIT each year was declining up until Jan2007. Then spending was unleashed by the Congress during the final two Bush Years. Here's the details from Obama's OMB:

    Year./Revenue./Spending./Defct.. (in billions of $)
    2001 /$1991.1 /$1862.9 / 128.2
    2002 /$1853.1 /$2010.9 /-157.8 >>> Sept 11/'01 wiped out $2Tril in GDP
    2003 /$1782.3 /$2159.9 /-377.6
    2004 /$1880.1 /$2292.9 /-412.7 >>> Middle IncTax cuts start
    2005 /$2153.6 /$2472.0 /-318.3
    2006 /$2406.9 /$2655.1 /-248.2 >>> Top IncTax Cuts start Dems elected
    2007 /$2568.0 /$2728.7 /-160.7 >>> Record U.S. Treasury Revenue
    2008 /$2524.0 /$2982.5 /-458.6
    2009 /$2105.0 /$3517.7 /-1412.7
    2010 /$2162.7 /$3456.2 /-1293.5
    2011 /$2303.5 /$3603.1 /-1299.6
    2012 (Est)/$2468.6 /$3795.5 /-1326.9

    See for yourself at the WHITEHOUSE's OMB website: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sit...
    == == ==
    Please note the surplus carry-over from the Clinton/Gingrich era budget in 2001, which was eliminated by the 9/11/01 spike which disrupted the economy (destroying over $2T in GDP). Also note the declining deficits as the tax rate cuts were phased in for upper income brackets.

    In Jan2007 Dems took control of Congress/Senate passing spending for next yr, overriding Bush vetos. 2008, spending bills take affect, spending increases. In Jan2009, Obama uncorks congressional spending (note the almost TRILLION increase and deficit jump from $458B to $1412B in '09)

    Obama never had trillion dollar deficitsin every year of his term as president. BTW - you said " We tried that experiment for 12 yrs"
    == == ==
    Patent1 said: "Time to do something different."

    Finally, YOU and I AGREE!!! But the problem is that on November 6th, the voters said we should continue doing the same thing and NOT do anything different.

    YOU & I finally agree in that I voted for Gary Johnson. Unlike Barry and Mitt, who only promised to reduce the deficit spending but would continue piling on more and more debt. Gary Johnson was the only other candidate on all of the state ballots that pledged to ELIMINATE the deficit in his first term... just as he did as governor for two terms in New Mexico. Me and 1.1 Million other voters agreed that Gary Johnson was the proper man for the job. He was a candidate that was Socially Liberal, but Fiscally Conservative.

    But three times that many voters (*) decided to continue with the status quo and maintain our devided government and massive trillion dollar deficit spending.
    == == ==
    Can you provide citation for your "the deficit is still growing because of the bush 2 tax cuts" claim?

    I'm still trying to find out Obama's plan once he has his $85 Billion tax increase on how he will remidy a Trillion dollar deficit... which is the question I've been asking on this thread. BTW - Unlike our friend Contard, thank you for the civil responce and discussion. - AV

    * Barry got approximately three million more popular votes than did Mitt.
    (more)
  • Contard... Adakin ... 2012/11/29 04:27:23
  • Patent1 Adakin ... 2012/11/29 18:39:09
  • Contard... Patent1 2012/11/29 18:43:17
  • Adakin ... Patent1 2012/12/03 03:21:05
    Adakin Valorem~PWCM~JLA
    Sorry Patent1 but ConChicken will not permit me to rebut your claim (*) with any relevent link ( like http://www.taxpolicycenter.or... ).

    So you are left with the high praise from "Thread Master" and no comment from me! Take care now! :-)

    (* Now quit harassing my friends... if you want some to answer your question then start your own thread... GOT IT? Last warning.)
  • Contard... Adakin ... 2012/12/03 04:03:01
  • Adakin ... Contard... 2012/12/03 04:29:18
    Adakin Valorem~PWCM~JLA
    +1
    Sorry, I read the OL comments from you AFTER posting the above two comments to Patent1. Please see my reply there... Thks AV
  • Patent1 Adakin ... 2012/12/03 04:43:05
  • Adakin ... Patent1 2012/12/03 18:58:24 (edited)
    Adakin Valorem~PWCM~JLA
    +1
    Wow, such language! (And I AM the one that got censured???)

    Be careful Patent1, the "Thread Master" doesn't like it when I harass his friends... it’s hard to "be respectful" to those that are no longer civil.

    Besides, "Thread Master" might spank me if I retaliate... (Then again, I might like it!! :-)
    == == ==

    Patent1 said: "The bush2 tax cuts are a disaster. They have added trillions to the deficit, and are adding to the deficit as I type this."

    Patent1, here's my question to you; Are the same tax rates are applicable today, the same tax rates that were applicable in 2007 when tax revenue was at an all-time record high?

    If so, how can you claim that it was Bush's tax rate cuts that "have added trillions to the deficit" and continue "as I type this"???

    (NOTE TO THREAD MASTER: ConChick, please let me know if I get close to overstepping my bounds, I don't want to be construed "harassing" Mr. Potty Mouth)

    Patent1, maybe, just maybe... tax rates have nothing to do with actual tax revenue and everything to do with the change in the guard on Nov'06 of those who were in control of the only entity that is constitutionally authorized to actually pass spending bills.

    Given that the bills passed in 2007 didn't actually take effect until '08, note how the deficit almost tr...

    &
    Wow, such language! (And I AM the one that got censured???)

    Be careful Patent1, the "Thread Master" doesn't like it when I harass his friends... it’s hard to "be respectful" to those that are no longer civil.

    Besides, "Thread Master" might spank me if I retaliate... (Then again, I might like it!! :-)
    == == ==

    Patent1 said: "The bush2 tax cuts are a disaster. They have added trillions to the deficit, and are adding to the deficit as I type this."

    Patent1, here's my question to you; Are the same tax rates are applicable today, the same tax rates that were applicable in 2007 when tax revenue was at an all-time record high?

    If so, how can you claim that it was Bush's tax rate cuts that "have added trillions to the deficit" and continue "as I type this"???

    (NOTE TO THREAD MASTER: ConChick, please let me know if I get close to overstepping my bounds, I don't want to be construed "harassing" Mr. Potty Mouth)

    Patent1, maybe, just maybe... tax rates have nothing to do with actual tax revenue and everything to do with the change in the guard on Nov'06 of those who were in control of the only entity that is constitutionally authorized to actually pass spending bills.

    Given that the bills passed in 2007 didn't actually take effect until '08, note how the deficit almost tripled from $160B in ’07 to almost $460B in 2008.

    Referring to that “IRRELEVENT” link from the Whitehouse's OMB ( http://www.taxpolicycenter.or... ) spending from 2007 to 2009 dramatically increased as did the deficit, adding almost $790 Billion to the national debt. And the unemployment rate increased commensurately after Nancy & Harry got control of their respective gavels.
    (more)
  • Contard... Adakin ... 2012/12/03 19:16:46
  • Adakin ... Contard... 2012/12/04 01:17:51
    Adakin Valorem~PWCM~JLA
    "Population change"? 2010 Census reported 308.7 million people in the United States, a 9.7 percent increase from the Census 2000 population of 281.4 million. http://www.census.gov/prod/ce...

    Of course, while the population increased by 9.7% over those ten years, the national debt increased by 239% (from $5.674Trillion to $13.561Trillion) Is that your point, ConChickie Darling?

    == == ==
    "Cost of the 'Shrub Wars"?" I googled "Cost of the Bush Wars" and got numbers all over the map, ranging from under a trillion to well over $13 Trillion. The sources range from flaming anti-Bush sites to the opposite extreme and include those with ".gov" at the end.
    After reading a few of them, this one looked reasonable, http://costofwar.com/ they claim just under $1.4 Trillion and provide a ongoing running total with support. So take your pick of numbers.

    My observation is simply based upon the annual gross revenue, gross spending and residual deficit figures as provided by Whitehouse.gov's OMB chart which the Tax Policy Center has linked.

    Of course "Potty Mouth" says that link is not relevant, but claims to source the same OMB data but without link.
    == == ==
    BTW - "Potty Mouth" said "Taxes for the upper bracket need to be raised back to 70% where they were after Vietnam, or back to...





    &







    "Population change"? 2010 Census reported 308.7 million people in the United States, a 9.7 percent increase from the Census 2000 population of 281.4 million. http://www.census.gov/prod/ce...

    Of course, while the population increased by 9.7% over those ten years, the national debt increased by 239% (from $5.674Trillion to $13.561Trillion) Is that your point, ConChickie Darling?

    == == ==
    "Cost of the 'Shrub Wars"?" I googled "Cost of the Bush Wars" and got numbers all over the map, ranging from under a trillion to well over $13 Trillion. The sources range from flaming anti-Bush sites to the opposite extreme and include those with ".gov" at the end.
    After reading a few of them, this one looked reasonable, http://costofwar.com/ they claim just under $1.4 Trillion and provide a ongoing running total with support. So take your pick of numbers.

    My observation is simply based upon the annual gross revenue, gross spending and residual deficit figures as provided by Whitehouse.gov's OMB chart which the Tax Policy Center has linked.

    Of course "Potty Mouth" says that link is not relevant, but claims to source the same OMB data but without link.
    == == ==
    BTW - "Potty Mouth" said "Taxes for the upper bracket need to be raised back to 70% where they were after Vietnam, or back to 94% where they were just after WW2."

    I would whole heartedly agree with that statement, as long as we also had the same deductions that provided the average tax paid by the upper income earners to be approximately 23% of their gross earnings after taking every deduction and loophole available to them back in those days. Of course Reagan's TRA'86 eliminated most of those deductions, and simply lowered the top rate down to 28%, which provided approximately the same amount of net tax liability while simpifying the entire system. The result was almost doubling the tax revenue from $517B to $991B. http://www.taxpolicycenter.or...

    I can only assume that Potty Mouth is a CPA or a tax accountant as collecting a fee for the documentation, compiling and filing for those complex tax returns and figuring in all the loopholes and deductions that were available back then would generate massive fees for someone in that line of work.

    Personally I would simply abolish the entire tax code and impose a simple flat and fair national sales tax and provide every taxpayer with a refund of all taxes paid on spending up to the poverty level. Suddenly Warren Buffet and his secretary would pay exactly the same amount of sales tax on that Big Mac & fries while spending their untaxed earnings.

    Such a plan would bring Americans back together instead of tearing them apart via class envy and greed. It would reward productivity while allowing the poorest among us to not pay ANY taxes (even the lowest wage earner now pays 15.3% employment tax) Gary Johnson was the last candidate standing (after Axelrod destroyed Herman Cain's campaign) that would have abolished the tax code that effectively imposes a defacto lien upon every dime you will ever earn. and every dime of assets you have accrued after you die... with the Plantation Massah choosing how much they take based on THEIR needs, not you or your family's needs.

    We all need to take a few steps back and ask what the real problem is, and whether or not increasing taxes by itself is a job creation measure without having benefit of all of the other factors that were in place back in the days when tax rates were as high as what Patent1 claims to wants us to have.

    We live in a dynamic economy. Over 95% of all wealth "lives" in cyberspace where a simple click of a mouse can send billion of dollars worth of capital to the far reaches of the globe. Yet we have massively complex tax policies that keep that capital from coming back to us.

    Again, instead of celebrating the demise of a roadblock to increased penalties on those that make the choices we actually WANT people to make, what are some SOLUTIONS for creating jobs?
    (more)
  • Patent1 Adakin ... 2012/12/04 02:08:23
    Patent1
    +1
    You want jobs?? TAKE SOME OF THE MONEY AWAY FROM THE RICH AND BIG CORPS AND SPREAD IT AROUND.
  • Adakin ... Patent1 2012/12/04 02:49:22
    Adakin Valorem~PWCM~JLA
    Wow, you and John Dillinger must have had the same idea!

    Like Minds, eh?
  • Patent1 Adakin ... 2012/12/04 03:05:11
  • Adakin ... Patent1 2012/12/04 03:48:59
  • Patent1 Adakin ... 2012/12/04 19:18:51
    Patent1
    Here ya go, chucklenuts, For every billion dollars taken out of the economy, 20,000 jobs are lost.

    "A recent estimate by Moody’s Investors show that Apple has about $74 billion in overseas cash reserve. That is also the highest amount off a huge list of U.S Tech companies including Microsoft, Oracle, Qualcomm etc. Microsoft has $50 billion in overseas cash reserves, Cisco has $42.3 billion, Oracle and Qualcomm follow with $25.1 billion and $16.5 billion respectively. Apple had $64 billion in cash reserves last December 2011"

    http://www.ijailbreak.com/new...

    SEE HOW MANY LINKS YOU CAN FIND! ITS FUN! ITS EASY!
  • Adakin ... Patent1 2012/12/04 19:55:36 (edited)
    Adakin Valorem~PWCM~JLA
    "For every billion dollars taken out of the economy, 20,000 jobs are lost"

    Wow, I'll bet that's the reason why the CBO says that Obama's $500 Billion in new tax increases will destroy over 700,000 jobs over the next 5yrs!

    == == ==
    Maybe if those billions in offshore capital looking for investment opportunities were allowed to return to the U.S. without being subjected to a draconian 35% tax that money would find its way into job creation... like maybe a construction project or factory or business start up in your community.

    But as it is, it is sitting off shore where it is available for investment anywhere else in the world. Except where it is not welcome.

    I too have a few thousand bucks sitting in an off shore account. I bought some Costa Rican real estate and made a killing on selling off the waterfront home sites several years ago. After paying the Costa Rican Gov't the taxes on my profits, I could have brought the money into the U.S., but I would have been taxed AGAIN on my NET AFTER TAX earnings. So instead, that money is parked in a Santiago bank where it is available for whatever opportunity I can find... as long as it isn't in the U.S.

    Tell your congresscritters to pass HR-25 into law and you will quickly see all that corporate money (and my paltry thousands of...



    "For every billion dollars taken out of the economy, 20,000 jobs are lost"

    Wow, I'll bet that's the reason why the CBO says that Obama's $500 Billion in new tax increases will destroy over 700,000 jobs over the next 5yrs!

    == == ==
    Maybe if those billions in offshore capital looking for investment opportunities were allowed to return to the U.S. without being subjected to a draconian 35% tax that money would find its way into job creation... like maybe a construction project or factory or business start up in your community.

    But as it is, it is sitting off shore where it is available for investment anywhere else in the world. Except where it is not welcome.

    I too have a few thousand bucks sitting in an off shore account. I bought some Costa Rican real estate and made a killing on selling off the waterfront home sites several years ago. After paying the Costa Rican Gov't the taxes on my profits, I could have brought the money into the U.S., but I would have been taxed AGAIN on my NET AFTER TAX earnings. So instead, that money is parked in a Santiago bank where it is available for whatever opportunity I can find... as long as it isn't in the U.S.

    Tell your congresscritters to pass HR-25 into law and you will quickly see all that corporate money (and my paltry thousands of dollars) moved back to good ol' USA and working to rebuild OUR economy.

    Change the tax law and you change the investment strategy of all those corporations. But with the taxes that January 1, 2013 has in store for ALL of us... you can bet that even more people are right now, moving their capital to where our government cannot get their hands on that which does not belong to them.

    BTW - Walmart announced that it will be paying its dividends out BEFORE the end of the year instead of the usual after year end... so as to allow their shareholders the opportunity to avoid the new dividend tax that jumps from 15% to 45% after Jan1.
    (more)
  • Patent1 Adakin ... 2012/12/05 04:55:01 (edited)
    Patent1
    +1
    Obama's tax increases put that money back into the economy to create jobs. Where do you think that money goes? Obviously you aren't intelligent enough to know.
  • Adakin ... Patent1 2012/12/05 13:31:01 (edited)
    Adakin Valorem~PWCM~JLA
    "Obama's tax increases put that money back into the economy to create jobs"

    Oh yeah, and look at Barry's track record of picking great companies to subsidize. 40% are bankrupt and the remaining cannot survive without subsidy. Besides, 42% of all of Barry's spending is from money that Bernanki PRINTED out of thin air. The resulting inflation is what hit's the poor the hardest while destroying their limit purchasing power.
    == == ==
    "Where do you think that money goes?"

    YES... let's take a look at where it goes... right into the pockets of Barry's crony buddies at places like Solyndra, Beacon Power and similar "green" job boondoggles. Example:
    From Investors Business Daily: "Obama's Green Energy Investments Continue to Fail"... "Each week, it seems, brings fresh evidence that the Obama administration's obsession with so-called clean energy is an increasingly costly failure." Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/ibd...

    Obama spent over $90 Billion on his failed "Job Programs"... that's $5 Billion MORE than what he wants to take from "the rich" in tax rate increases. On the other hand, "The Rich" have a far better track record of picking and choosing winners and losers in the business world as it seems that Barry only knows how to find LOSERS.

    track record picking choosing winners losers business world barry losers
  • Patent1 Adakin ... 2012/12/07 05:23:24
  • Adakin ... Patent1 2012/12/07 16:32:41
    Adakin Valorem~PWCM~JLA
    More words of wisdom from "Potty Mouth" John Dillinger!
  • Contard... Adakin ... 2012/12/04 14:13:19
  • Adakin ... Contard... 2012/12/04 14:28:02 (edited)
    Adakin Valorem~PWCM~JLA
    +1
    Trickle down capitalism or trickle up poverty... take your choice.

    BTW - with your numerous "LMAO" use... you must not have any "A" left at all!

    I wish my "A" was whole lot smaller! Maybe I should start laughing at the wrong direction our "Republicarat" leaders are taking us...

    Thanks :-)
  • Contard... Adakin ... 2012/12/04 17:18:39
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 9 Next » Last »

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/07/24 13:02:39

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals