We tried to tell you...

[Kangaroo]

Originally Posted by MANOWAR

Get our troops the best gear not just more gear. Shop smart. Shop S Mart.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFriRcIwqNU

Every state senator's MO is to bring as much federal money back to their state. Job security.

[KMac]

Originally Posted by Kangaroo

They're looking at 20-30% cuts in defense spending currently for the next 10 years. The tax system that brings in the money also pays for a lot of good stuff and good jobs.

I couldn't care less if it pays for "a lot of good stuff". If the Constitution doesn't provide for the govt spending one red cent on it, then it's govt waste and an erosion of how this country was set up and intended to run. Not to mention, "good" is subjective.

[Kangaroo]

article 1 section 8

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

[KMac]

Originally Posted by Kangaroo

article 1 section 8

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

This is exactly why gov't is so massive and believes there is no limit on their size and power. As one example, providing for the general welfare of the United States is just that, providing for the welfare of the group of states. It does not say to provide for the welfare of citizens of the united states. The states, themselves, can be in great welfare even if a portion of their citizens can't work, won't work, don't know how to work, have bad health, eat like fcvking pigs, drink like there is no tomorrow, suck dicks until they contradict incurable diseases, etc. I can't think of a more relevant, recent, bigger example of this than Obamacare.

...and if it's so "uniform throughout the United States", then why is the President and every other socialist crying for raising taxes on the wealthy (or ANY characterized citizen for that matter); it clearly says they shall be taxed uniformly.

[Kangaroo]

Angry much??? You can't blame them for trying.

[KMac]

Originally Posted by Kangaroo

Angry much??? You can't blame them for trying.

don't confuse anger with disgust.

[Fikays]

Originally Posted by KMac

This is exactly why gov't is so massive and believes there is no limit on their size and power. As one example, providing for the general welfare of the United States is just that, providing for the welfare of the group of states. It does not say to provide for the welfare of citizens of the united states. The states, themselves, can be in great welfare even if a portion of their citizens can't work, won't work, don't know how to work, have bad health, eat like fcvking pigs, drink like there is no tomorrow, suck dicks until they contradict incurable diseases, etc. I can't think of a more relevant, recent, bigger example of this than Obamacare.

...and if it's so "uniform throughout the United States", then why is the President and every other socialist crying for raising taxes on the wealthy (or ANY characterized citizen for that matter); it clearly says they shall be taxed uniformly.

Not to mention those public servants excusing themselves from participating in this "mandatory" healthcare "reform". :rollseyes

[Kangaroo]

Originally Posted by KMac

don't confuse anger with disgust.

Both usually go hand in hand. Ultimately and hopefully in our lifetime we will get to a flat tax of some sort. It will happen.

[KMac]

Originally Posted by Kangaroo

Both usually go hand in hand. Ultimately and hopefully in our lifetime we will get to a flat tax of some sort. It will happen.

It may happen, but probably not before financially catastrophic events occur first.

[Kangaroo]

we have the fiscal cliff coming right up... :

[Oz_R1]

Originally Posted by Kangaroo

we have the fiscal cliff coming right up... :

Step 1) Approach fiscal cliff
Step 2) Push the greeks off it
Step 3) ???
Step 4) Profit

[Rex1585]

Originally Posted by Oz_R1

Step 1) Approach fiscal cliff
Step 2) Push the greeks off it
Step 3) ???
Step 4) Profit

[Ronin R1]

Originally Posted by WarMachine

Won't deny some supporters are like that but not all, both sides shit on each other and all sides lost.

[Creeping Death]

Originally Posted by Fikays

Doesn't matter now anyways....all you Ron Paul supporters live in the same country we do...what the f*ck is there to gloat about???

We were pushed around, physically assaulted, cheated out of a fair nomination process (not cheated out of a win, but cheated out of a 'fair process'), we were laughed at and told we were "a non-factor".

As it turns out we WERE A FACTOR, that's what there is to gloat about. But don't worry about Obama's win, Rmoney would have been Obama's second term anyway.

Originally Posted by KMac

apparently, they think they've taught somebody a lesson. Not sure who, or what the lesson is, but as long as they think they taught it, I guess that's intrinsically important to them.

I don't think we taught you a lesson, but there are lessons to be learned.

1. Know what your party stands for. Today's Republican party is so perverted, dysfuntional, out of touch, and distant from it's conservative principles, Ronald Reagan couldn't get nominated.

2. If you're going to cheat, be sneaky about. If you cheat right in front of everyone and especially on camera, people are going to call you out on it.

3. A republican government is from the people up, not the leaders down. Don't fvcking tell us who to vote for and expect us to do as we're told and like it. WE THE PEOPLE do the nominating, the leaders don't 'appoint' a nominee.

There are more but you're a very intelligent man, you'll figure them out.

Originally Posted by Fikays

I don't know who either. This is teh exact attitude I have always received from R. Paul supporters....like they know something the rest of us do not. Thinking they can just look down on non-supporters. It is ridiculous, really, cause all they did was help f*ck us all by staging their "protest".



Agreed.

Voting your conscience is not a protest.

Originally Posted by KMac

Paul is a Libertarian.

No, Paul was the only REAL Republican running. The Libertarian party came about because the republican party wasn't and isn't acting like 'republicans'

Originally Posted by KMac

...and Romney got caught saying this on camera.



nevertheless, cutting their noses off to spite their face is a ridiculous approach.

1. One of the few truths to ever come out of Rmoney's mouth, I almost felt a little sympathy for him catching hell over it.

2. Voting your conscience is not cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Originally Posted by KMac

so the philosophy of the Paul camp is "all or nothing". If he doesn't get the nomination, then they see zero value in continuing to push the conservative party (at least from the stand point of being more conservative than the opposition) to gain at least a few steps in the direction they want to go?

The republicans are not conservative. You (not you, you) can call yourself whatever you want but if you don't 'walk the walk' it's just a lie.

Originally Posted by headshake1

You want to blame liberals for the entitlement-specific expenditures that contribute to the deficit? It's actually a myth that liberals or democrats are the party of entitlements. But that's just the kind of ignorant, media-feuled bi-partisanship that is destroying any concerted effort to fix any of our problems. Maybe you should read a little more instead of listening to the Shawn Hannitys and Rush Limbaughs of the world.

From the Wall Street Journal http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...931313542.html

From a purely statistical standpoint, the growth of entitlement spending over the past half-century has been distinctly greater under Republican administrations than Democratic ones. Between 1960 and 2010, the growth of entitlement spending was exponential, but in any given year, it was on the whole roughly 8% higher if the president happened to be a Republican rather than a Democrat.

That can't be true, the Republicans call themselves conservative so they must be.

Originally Posted by Fikays

How the f*ck would you know what it is? You claim to have never been on it and never use it so how in the f*ck would you ever know how some of us use it???

You're showing your ignorance now Rex; you should just drop it.

He's a closet Facebooker.

Originally Posted by z064life

How do you make an Italian bike LESS reliable

Make it in China

Originally Posted by Fikays

The shit is tired. It is incessant and just like the "gay" shit it's old.

If folks are going to "joke" about something they should expect any and all kinds of responses.

Amen, Brother! I got sick of the 'Fikays is gay' threads a long time ago. I don't know how you put up with that shit for so long.

[Fikays]

Originally Posted by Creeping Death

We were pushed around, physically assaulted, cheated out of a fair nomination process (not cheated out of a win, but cheated out of a 'fair process'), we were laughed at and told we were "a non-factor".

As it turns out we WERE A FACTOR, that's what there is to gloat about. But don't worry about Obama's win, Rmoney would have been Obama's second term anyway.



I don't think we taught you a lesson, but there are lessons to be learned.

1. Know what your party stands for. Today's Republican party is so perverted, dysfuntional, out of touch, and distant from it's conservative principles, Ronald Reagan couldn't get nominated.

2. If you're going to cheat, be sneaky about. If you cheat right in front of everyone and especially on camera, people are going to call you out on it.

3. A republican government is from the people up, not the leaders down. Don't fvcking tell us who to vote for and expect us to do as we're told and like it. WE THE PEOPLE do the nominating, the leaders don't 'appoint' a nominee.

There are more but you're a very intelligent man, you'll figure them out.




Voting your conscience is not a protest.



No, Paul was the only REAL Republican running. The Libertarian party came about because the republican party wasn't and isn't acting like 'republicans'



1. One of the few truths to ever come out of Rmoney's mouth, I almost felt a little sympathy for him catching hell over it.

2. Voting your conscience is not cutting off your nose to spite your face.



The republicans are not conservative. You (not you, you) can call yourself whatever you want but if you don't 'walk the walk' it's just a lie.



That can't be true, the Republicans call themselves conservative so they must be.



He's a closet Facebooker.



Make it in China



Amen, Brother! I got sick of the 'Fikays is gay' threads a long time ago. I don't know how you put up with that shit for so long.

Even if you are a R.Paul supporter you're cool with me.





/just don't talk about cloud seeding anymore.

[InfinitiR1]

I agree. The gay thread about frank is getting gay.

[Fikays]

[Creeping Death]

Originally Posted by Fikays

Even if you are a R.Paul supporter you're cool with me.





/just don't talk about cloud seeding anymore.

Is cloud seeding not a better subject than 'Fikays is gay'?


(Not necassarily directed at you) I want to add to my post above that I didn't not vote for Rmoney because he wasn't Ron Paul or for spite. I didn't vote for Rmoney because the only thing that scared me more than 4 more years of Obama was 8 years of Rmoney. I probably would have voted for any other Republican candidate.

I voted for Gary Johnson. I knew he wasn't going to win but its time we had another choice. The Libertarian party didn't even come close to the 15% they needed but maybe next time. But, we'll never have a third option as long as people continue supporting the two party system.

People say they want change yet they continue voting the same way expecting a different result each time. That's the definition of insanity.

[Meister37]

Originally Posted by KMac

Mitch Daniels is 4X the candidate Ron Paul is. Daniels has done it, Paul has only talked about it.

Daniels is a strict constitutionalist and a fiscal conservative. Just what we need right now so there's no chance he would run. They would pay him off with a cushy job at a big university and a stipend. Oh wait, they did that.

Originally Posted by KMac

...and Romney got caught saying this on camera.



nevertheless, cutting their noses off to spite their face is a ridiculous approach.

Just look how short sighted the Tea Party is. They defeat a long standing (too Long IMO) moderate republican in the primary and vote in a strict conservative for their candidate, who gets crushed at the polls. One less red seat, Perfect Irony.

Originally Posted by Gearheaded

You can't bundle Paul supporters together, same with any candidate. You know that.

That's like saying all democrats are jobless leeches, and all republicans hate abortion and own slaves...

Republicans were responsible for most civil rights legislation.

Originally Posted by headshake1

You want to blame liberals for the entitlement-specific expenditures that contribute to the deficit? It's actually a myth that liberals or democrats are the party of entitlements. But that's just the kind of ignorant, media-feuled bi-partisanship that is destroying any concerted effort to fix any of our problems. Maybe you should read a little more instead of listening to the Shawn Hannitys and Rush Limbaughs of the world.

From the Wall Street Journal http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...931313542.html

From a purely statistical standpoint, the growth of entitlement spending over the past half-century has been distinctly greater under Republican administrations than Democratic ones. Between 1960 and 2010, the growth of entitlement spending was exponential, but in any given year, it was on the whole roughly 8% higher if the president happened to be a Republican rather than a Democrat.

The big difference is, the demo entitlement programs take direct money from the general fund to keep people fat and happy, the rep entitlement programs tax a little less or hold controls on products to help a working person make more. If the reps entitlement programs stop, the government will make more money and the person less. If you stop the dem programs people will start being true citizens of the country or die. Either way, money in the general fund.

Originally Posted by Kangaroo

The rich needs help with tax breaks, the poor needs help with entitlements, and in the end the middle class gets screwed. Why are people surprised by this?

Yep, we cannot bear the cost, but they keep spending the money. Both dems and reps are the enemies of the state. Had they done much of this legislation 100 years ago they would be hung for treason on the white house lawn.