NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I like to invision my Pailin like this-

palinporn101.jpg
 


dchuk said:
Really dude? Really? I'd take a bullet to the head over Palin as President any day, she's a fucking failure of a human being and deserves no respect or attention.
Click to expand...

Maybe so. But at least she would not proactively destroy the economy. The issue was Palin over Obama. And Palin wins in my book, hands down.
 
being self employed, I'd sure as hell want someone like palin being the president than obama. I don't exactly know her specific positions, but she's painted as being quite a conservative correct? that means I get to keep more of my money.
 
I am blown away. She's simply unintelligent. She's not qualified to be president of her local po-dunk PTA, much less our country.

Bottom line: if she wins, I'm in Costa Rica within 24 hours.
 
dchuk said:
I am blown away. She's simply unintelligent. She's not qualified to be president of her local po-dunk PTA, much less our country.

Bottom line: if she wins, I'm in Costa Rica within 24 hours.
Click to expand...

why is everyone picking these countries where you have *more* restrictions, and less internet?
 
We gotta get outta this place
If it's the last thing we ever doooo
We gotta get outta this place...
Girl there's a better life... in Costa Ricaaaaaaaa.

Thank you very much, thank you.
 
dreamache said:
being self employed, I'd sure as hell want someone like palin being the president than obama. I don't exactly know her specific positions, but she's painted as being quite a conservative correct? that means I get to keep more of my money.
Click to expand...

It's an unwise strategy to only care for richest 1-2-3% whatever percentage of population. As you slowly deprive the lower and middle class infrastructure, education, medicare, social security etc. you will in the long run have less people to sell your services to... It's not necessarily *always* great to mindlessly vote for policy that makes the rich richer (who might invest overseas) and the poor poorer. Infact it may make good sense to ensure you have a growing middleclass that can give optimal conditions for the next generations. If it means those who earn above 250k/year don't get a tax break then oh well, they will benefit of having more potential customers :)

Just my POV from overseas. But really, blaming Democrats for anything with economy seems wrong to me. At least like over the last 20-25 years. perspective it seems to me Democrats are the ones turning the wave away from disaster. (But yes, you have a huge deficit in US, but who to blame... ponder ponder ponder... No, not the Democrats... Then who... Ponder ponder ponder)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Versus
computergames said:
It's an unwise strategy to only care for richest 1-2-3% whatever percentage of population. As you slowly deprive the lower and middle class infrastructure, education, medicare, social security etc. you will in the long run have less people to sell your services to... It's not necessarily *always* great to mindlessly vote for policy that makes the rich richer (who might invest overseas) and the poor poorer. Infact it may make good sense to ensure you have a growing middleclass that can give optimal conditions for the next generations. If it means those who earn above 250k/year don't get a tax break then oh well, they will benefit of having more potential customers :)

Just my POV from overseas. But really, blaming Democrats for anything with economy seems wrong to me. At least like over the last 20-25 years. perspective it seems to me Democrats are the ones turning the wave away from disaster. (But yes, you have a huge deficit in US, but who to blame... ponder ponder ponder... No, not the Democrats... Then who... Ponder ponder ponder)
Click to expand...

Really? I do not care if the rich get richer as long as I get richer too. In fact if the disparity gets greater but I am doing better also then fantastic. But this crap where the poor have to pay $4 for gas and more fees every which way they turn.... they have no hope because starting a business is prohibitive. Thank you Deathocrats. Are you a independent truck driver? They got screwed by the Democrats in favor of Big Trucking. How about a ...... ah screw it.

And it is the Democrats that are kicking people out of their homes and not negotiating loans on homes only to sell the packages of foreclosed homes to big investors for 1/2 what they could have gotten from the existing homeowner. Oh, right, the Democrats are for the little guy.

Wake Up!

Think my friend. The democrats hurt the poor. Who the hell do you think more regulation helps? The start up business? No the Democrats who are helping their buddies in the corporations. Yes, I said it - the democrats help the rich corporations get richer through regulation and increased barriers of entry.

The deficit - Really? The Republicans may be less than blameless but the Democrats, they cannot spend enough. Trillions baby.

And screw the $250K number - read the stats - that was BS they are taxing way down from there.

Who is depriving the lower and middle classes? This is the crap I heard in brainwashing first year Poli Sci classes.

You are 100% wrong. Sorry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: onigen
computergames said:
It's an unwise strategy to only care for richest 1-2-3% whatever percentage of population. As you slowly deprive the lower and middle class infrastructure, education, medicare, social security etc. you will in the long run have less people to sell your services to... It's not necessarily *always* great to mindlessly vote for policy that makes the rich richer (who might invest overseas) and the poor poorer. Infact it may make good sense to ensure you have a growing middleclass that can give optimal conditions for the next generations. If it means those who earn above 250k/year don't get a tax break then oh well, they will benefit of having more potential customers :)

Just my POV from overseas. But really, blaming Democrats for anything with economy seems wrong to me. At least like over the last 20-25 years. perspective it seems to me Democrats are the ones turning the wave away from disaster. (But yes, you have a huge deficit in US, but who to blame... ponder ponder ponder... No, not the Democrats... Then who... Ponder ponder ponder)
Click to expand...

Because Carter did such a great job helping our economy...

Also since when do tax breaks for the rich make the poor poorer?
 
dreamache said:
being self employed, I'd sure as hell want someone like palin being the president than obama. I don't exactly know her specific positions, but she's painted as being quite a conservative correct? that means I get to keep more of my money.
Click to expand...

Dwight Eisenhower was probably the last conservative to really act like one once elected president.

Gov. Sarah Palin’s Record on Taxes and Spending | Cato @ Liberty


REIMktg said:
Yeah we need more of this patriot...

images
Click to expand...

Thanks for bringing back a picture that outraged grandparents were email forwarding 3 years ago.

REIMktg said:
No the Democrats who are helping their buddies in the corporations. Yes, I said it - the democrats help the rich corporations get richer through regulation and increased barriers of entry.
Click to expand...

Not that this completely false, but why do corporations tend to favor republicans while labor unions favor democrats?

The deficit - Really? The Republicans may be less than blameless but the Democrats, they cannot spend enough. Trillions baby.
Click to expand...

Except for the current guy, the debt has gone down every time a democrat has been president since World War II. You have to go back 40 years to Nixon for the last reduction under a republican, and again back to Eisenhower for a substantial lowering.

Rand Paul: Republicans aren’t serious about cutting spending
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom