On Jul 23, 5:50*pm, jps wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:47:11 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:13:19 -0700, jps wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:18:26 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:06:50 -0700, jps wrote:

You think there are more rich Ds than Rs?

Just the ones with power, like Senators and presidents.
I am sure a lot more poor people believe Democrats are helping them
but if you can believe the chart Bob is selling this week, the "middle
class" got screwed as badly in the 90s as they did in the 2000s.

Oh, come on. *Those are the second and third tier sock puppets who do
the bidding of the truly powerful.

They write and pass laws to protect wealth and put systems in place to
ensure that the wealthy aren't disturbed.

My bet is that wealthy Ds are far more likely to accept a raise in
taxes than their Republican counterparts.

It certainly wouldn't be Kerry would it?

Singling out one example is silly and you know it.

Who (in this group especially) wouldn't want to avoid paying excise
tax on a boat purchase if they could do so by mooring the vessel in a
nearby state? *That's a ****load of moorage prepaid.

Being a Democrat doesn't obligate you to run towards paying taxes.

Being *a Republican does obligate you to tilt the tax structure
towards favoring the wealthy.

It is a simple case of hypocrisy, wanting other people to pay taxes he
is not willing to pay. This is the way of liberalism.

On Jul 23, 6:32*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Jul 23, 5:50*pm, jps wrote:



On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:47:11 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:13:19 -0700, jps wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:18:26 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:06:50 -0700, jps wrote:

You think there are more rich Ds than Rs?

Just the ones with power, like Senators and presidents.
I am sure a lot more poor people believe Democrats are helping them
but if you can believe the chart Bob is selling this week, the "middle
class" got screwed as badly in the 90s as they did in the 2000s.

Oh, come on. *Those are the second and third tier sock puppets who do
the bidding of the truly powerful.

They write and pass laws to protect wealth and put systems in place to
ensure that the wealthy aren't disturbed.

My bet is that wealthy Ds are far more likely to accept a raise in
taxes than their Republican counterparts.

It certainly wouldn't be Kerry would it?

Singling out one example is silly and you know it.

Who (in this group especially) wouldn't want to avoid paying excise
tax on a boat purchase if they could do so by mooring the vessel in a
nearby state? *That's a ****load of moorage prepaid.

Being a Democrat doesn't obligate you to run towards paying taxes.

Being *a Republican does obligate you to tilt the tax structure
towards favoring the wealthy.

It is a simple case of hypocrisy, wanting other people to pay taxes he
is not willing to pay. *This is the way of liberalism.

It is just like Gore lecturing on our "carbon footprint" while his is
64X that of the average person.

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:35:09 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

On Jul 23, 6:32*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Jul 23, 5:50*pm, jps wrote:



On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:47:11 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:13:19 -0700, jps wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:18:26 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:06:50 -0700, jps wrote:

You think there are more rich Ds than Rs?

Just the ones with power, like Senators and presidents.
I am sure a lot more poor people believe Democrats are helping them
but if you can believe the chart Bob is selling this week, the "middle
class" got screwed as badly in the 90s as they did in the 2000s.

Oh, come on. *Those are the second and third tier sock puppets who do
the bidding of the truly powerful.

They write and pass laws to protect wealth and put systems in place to
ensure that the wealthy aren't disturbed.

My bet is that wealthy Ds are far more likely to accept a raise in
taxes than their Republican counterparts.

It certainly wouldn't be Kerry would it?

Singling out one example is silly and you know it.

Who (in this group especially) wouldn't want to avoid paying excise
tax on a boat purchase if they could do so by mooring the vessel in a
nearby state? *That's a ****load of moorage prepaid.

Being a Democrat doesn't obligate you to run towards paying taxes.

Being *a Republican does obligate you to tilt the tax structure
towards favoring the wealthy.

It is a simple case of hypocrisy, wanting other people to pay taxes he
is not willing to pay. *This is the way of liberalism.

It is just like Gore lecturing on our "carbon footprint" while his is
64X that of the average person.

You are rife with dishonesty. Gore isn't an average person. Is he
any greater or less than a person in similar circumstances?

Relevant analysis wouldn't occur to a dishonest person looking only to
make illusory points. Only the mentally challenged Republican base
would fail to detect the odor of your thinking.

On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 11:13:47 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 16:01:47 -0700, jps wrote:

You are rife with dishonesty. Gore isn't an average person. Is he
any greater or less than a person in similar circumstances?

When they compared Gore's house with GWB's house it was apparent who
the real carbon hog was. Gore does live in a castle (now two castles)
but I guess he is a lot richer than Bush ... from selling phony carbon
credits and being a TV evangelist for a cult religion..
That is a business that makes CDO salesmen look like an honorable
profession.

You'd like to base your comparison on means? Then I'm certain he's a
piker when compared to most living on the top end of the means
spectrum. How many houses does McCain have? 5 or 9 or something like
that.

I'd rather base the comparison on that person's industry or lack
thereof. Most of Gore's carbon footprint was due to his travel.

What does GW Bush do that's in the least bit industrious? Speak on a
hack, has been tour for $15 a seat?

Whether you agree with Gore isn't the issue.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 16:01:47 -0700, jps wrote:

You are rife with dishonesty. Gore isn't an average person. Is he
any greater or less than a person in similar circumstances?

When they compared Gore's house with GWB's house it was apparent who
the real carbon hog was. Gore does live in a castle (now two castles)
but I guess he is a lot richer than Bush ... from selling phony carbon
credits and being a TV evangelist for a cult religion..
That is a business that makes CDO salesmen look like an honorable
profession.

Come on. The world's problems are not Gore's fault or Bush's fault, but when
you look at who has caused the most problems for the world, that would be
Bush and it's not even close.

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:32:49 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

On Jul 23, 5:50*pm, jps wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:47:11 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:13:19 -0700, jps wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:18:26 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:06:50 -0700, jps wrote:

You think there are more rich Ds than Rs?

Just the ones with power, like Senators and presidents.
I am sure a lot more poor people believe Democrats are helping them
but if you can believe the chart Bob is selling this week, the "middle
class" got screwed as badly in the 90s as they did in the 2000s.

Oh, come on. *Those are the second and third tier sock puppets who do
the bidding of the truly powerful.

They write and pass laws to protect wealth and put systems in place to
ensure that the wealthy aren't disturbed.

My bet is that wealthy Ds are far more likely to accept a raise in
taxes than their Republican counterparts.

It certainly wouldn't be Kerry would it?

Singling out one example is silly and you know it.

Who (in this group especially) wouldn't want to avoid paying excise
tax on a boat purchase if they could do so by mooring the vessel in a
nearby state? *That's a ****load of moorage prepaid.

Being a Democrat doesn't obligate you to run towards paying taxes.

Being *a Republican does obligate you to tilt the tax structure
towards favoring the wealthy.

It is a simple case of hypocrisy, wanting other people to pay taxes he
is not willing to pay. This is the way of liberalism.

You are so dishonest.

Based on your polar viewpoint, I'd be completely justified in assuming
that the conservative "way" is to not pay anything at all.

If you were stupid, I'd think your assumptions dubious.

Since I know you're not stupid, you are simply dishonest.

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:32:49 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

On Jul 23, 5:50*pm, jps wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:47:11 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:13:19 -0700, jps wrote:

It is a simple case of hypocrisy, wanting other people to pay taxes he
is not willing to pay. This is the way of liberalism.


gee the GOPS think the middle class should pay at 28% and the rich at
15

looks like that's the way of right wing ism

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
On Jul 23, 5:50 pm, jps wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:47:11 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:13:19 -0700, jps wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:18:26 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:06:50 -0700, jps wrote:

You think there are more rich Ds than Rs?

Just the ones with power, like Senators and presidents.
I am sure a lot more poor people believe Democrats are helping them
but if you can believe the chart Bob is selling this week, the "middle
class" got screwed as badly in the 90s as they did in the 2000s.

Oh, come on. Those are the second and third tier sock puppets who do
the bidding of the truly powerful.

They write and pass laws to protect wealth and put systems in place to
ensure that the wealthy aren't disturbed.

My bet is that wealthy Ds are far more likely to accept a raise in
taxes than their Republican counterparts.

It certainly wouldn't be Kerry would it?

Singling out one example is silly and you know it.

Who (in this group especially) wouldn't want to avoid paying excise
tax on a boat purchase if they could do so by mooring the vessel in a
nearby state? That's a ****load of moorage prepaid.

Being a Democrat doesn't obligate you to run towards paying taxes.

Being a Republican does obligate you to tilt the tax structure
towards favoring the wealthy.

It is a simple case of hypocrisy, wanting other people to pay taxes he
is not willing to pay. This is the way of liberalism.

In your case, it's a simple case of stupidity.