OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured persons is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care system nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise" ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big Government in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states that we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial, then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA folded to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr. Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug, were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy honored her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid, Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right. All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid Right can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought, a
rare commodity within their ranks.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin. I saw
no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did not use the
words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt even once.

Keep up the good work Kevin. ;-)




wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured persons is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care system nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise" ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big Government in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states that we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial, then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA folded to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr. Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug, were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy honored her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid, Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right. All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid Right can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought, a
rare commodity within their ranks.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin. I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt
even once.


While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the very words
you claim offend you.

Why is that?



When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.

Otherwise they are just words Harry.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Kevin,
That is a well written, thought provoking essay. Keep up the good work.


wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured persons is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care system nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise" ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big Government in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states that we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial, then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA folded to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr. Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug, were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy honored her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid, Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right. All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid Right can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought, a
rare commodity within their ranks.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Except for the fact that its assumptions are all wrong...............


"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Kevin,
That is a well written, thought provoking essay. Keep up the good work.


wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured persons is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care system nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise" ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big Government in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states that we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial, then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA folded to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr. Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug, were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy honored her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid, Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right. All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid Right can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought, a
rare commodity within their ranks.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin. I saw
no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did not use the
words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt even once.

Keep up the good work Kevin. ;-)

I'm not Kevin, you asshole. Now, go along, don't you have someone's
children you want to say ****ty things about, you low life *******?

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin. I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt
even once.


While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the very words
you claim offend you.

Why is that?



When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.

Gee, Jim, if that type of thing bothers you, what do you feel about
someone who would post lies about someone's dead mother? How do you
feel about someone who would make degrading remarks about someone's
wife and children? You do just exactly that, you low life scum.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

" JimH" wrote in message
...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin.
I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt
even once.
While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the very
words
you claim offend you.
Why is that?
When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.
Otherwise they are just words Harry.
I agree with you completely on this JimH. I too find cussing to be
offensive.

Jim C.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin. I
saw
no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did not use
the
words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt even once.

Keep up the good work Kevin. ;-)

I'm not Kevin, you asshole. Now, go along, don't you have someone's
children you want to say ****ty things about, you low life *******?


Sure. Don't you think your kids are being greedy and materialistic by
asking for a bike, PS2, ipod, Nintendo DS
and other things for Christmas, with the list, according to you, growing
longer every day?

You may see it differently. I see it as greed.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Thought provoking doesn't qualify or quantify what thoughts it provokes.
: )


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...
Except for the fact that its assumptions are all wrong...............


"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Kevin,
That is a well written, thought provoking essay. Keep up the good work.


wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured persons is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care system nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise" ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big Government in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states that we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial, then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA folded to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr. Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug, were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy honored her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid, Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right. All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid Right can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought, a
rare commodity within their ranks.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin.
I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did
not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt
even once.


While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the very
words
you claim offend you.

Why is that?



When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.

Gee, Jim, if that type of thing bothers you, what do you feel about
someone who would post lies about someone's dead mother? How do you
feel about someone who would make degrading remarks about someone's
wife and children? You do just exactly that, you low life scum.


I may have said something about Kevin's mother, wife and children smoking
the weed he grows. Why does that offend you?

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin.
I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did
not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt
even once.


While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the very
words
you claim offend you.

Why is that?



When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.

Gee, Jim, if that type of thing bothers you, what do you feel about
someone who would post lies about someone's dead mother? How do you
feel about someone who would make degrading remarks about someone's
wife and children? You do just exactly that, you low life scum.


I may have said something about Kevin's mother, wife and children smoking
the weed he grows. Why does that offend you?

YOU, you low life scum said those things about MY dead mother, MY wife,
and MY children. YOU have proven yourself to be the lowest piece of
**** here, Jim. A person just can't go any lower than that. **** you.
Now, do something about that, you worthless little twit.
So, Jim, how come your wife is so greedy that she made you sell your
boat?

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Was was talking about the "good work" LOL

"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Thought provoking doesn't qualify or quantify what thoughts it provokes.
: )


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...
Except for the fact that its assumptions are all wrong...............


"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Kevin,
That is a well written, thought provoking essay. Keep up the good
work.


wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs
of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system
is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American
Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market
medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for
profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured persons
is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care system
nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social
net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing
scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise" ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big Government
in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states that
we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers
every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the
Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial, then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month
fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in
the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's
safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA folded
to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with
diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr.
Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years
later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug, were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy honored
her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is
our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a
hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will
probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the
long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid, Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid
Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and
their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were
investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right.
All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid Right
can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought, a
rare commodity within their ranks.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Fred Dehl wrote:
The lowest 50% of wage earners pays just FIVE percent of income taxes.

The lowest 95% of wage earners pays just HALF of all income taxes.


Wrong

Let's see, there are two possibilities here... 1- you are
dittohead drone who genuinely believes all this fascist
propaganda, but are new to this newsgroup and genuinely
believe this 2- you're a new sockpuppet ID for one of the
same old dittohead drones that's been proven wrong over &
over again

In either case, you can easily go to the IRS web site and
see a nice statistical breakdown of tax burden by income
category.

Plus more than HALF the "cost of government" referred to is transfer
payments TO the poor and lower-middle-class.

Really? You mean like the way the Parks Service allows all
those poor people in their $100K motor homes to clog up
Yellowstone & Yosemite and all the other choice pieces of
taxpayer-owned real estate? Like the way the SEC is always
being careful to make sure that wealthy investors & stock
manipulators are not allowed to profit at the expense of
retirement funds? I could go on & on, but if you were ever
going to get the point, you already would have.

DSK

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...
wrote in
oups.com:

they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor?

The lowest 50% of wage earners pays just FIVE percent of income taxes.

The lowest 95% of wage earners pays just HALF of all income taxes.

Plus more than HALF the "cost of government" referred to is transfer
payments TO the poor and lower-middle-class.


When the top rate was 70%, the top 1% of income earners paid 19% of all
taxes, at the current 36%? the top 1% pay 34% of all income taxes.

Once again, Kevin fails econ 101.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial
Kevin.
I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did
not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or
dolt
even once.


While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the very
words
you claim offend you.

Why is that?



When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.

Gee, Jim, if that type of thing bothers you, what do you feel about
someone who would post lies about someone's dead mother? How do you
feel about someone who would make degrading remarks about someone's
wife and children? You do just exactly that, you low life scum.


I may have said something about Kevin's mother, wife and children smoking
the weed he grows. Why does that offend you?

YOU, you low life scum said those things about MY dead mother, MY wife,
and MY children. YOU have proven yourself to be the lowest piece of
**** here, Jim. A person just can't go any lower than that. **** you.
Now, do something about that, you worthless little twit.
So, Jim, how come your wife is so greedy that she made you sell your
boat?


Calm down.

Remarks were made about Kevin's mother and wife smoking dope. You said
you talked to Kevin over the weekend about the remarks with Kevin claiming
he would talk to his lawyer to sue me.

I did, however, say that I think your kids are being greedy for asking for a
bike, iPod, Nintendo, PS2 and other things for Christmas, with the list,
according to you, growing longer every day.

If that offends you.........tough.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)


You don't know what you are talking about.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

I was talking about the thesis/essay Kevin wrote and publish in rec.boats.
It sounded very profession, even if I didn't agree with the message. Don't
you agree?

; )


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...
Was was talking about the "good work" LOL

"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Thought provoking doesn't qualify or quantify what thoughts it provokes.
: )


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...
Except for the fact that its assumptions are all wrong...............


"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Kevin,
That is a well written, thought provoking essay. Keep up the good
work.


wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs
of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system
is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American
Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market
medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for
profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured persons
is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly
escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care system
nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social
net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing
scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise"
ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big Government
in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states that
we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers
every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the
Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial,
then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair
and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month
fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll
of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This
massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in
the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has
been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's
safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA folded
to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with
diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr.
Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years
later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug, were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy honored
her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug
for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is
our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a
hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will
probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term
the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the
long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid, Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual
indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid
Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not
guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been
the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and
their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were
investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right.
All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid Right
can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought, a
rare commodity within their ranks.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

"Dan J.S." wrote in message
...

wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)


You don't know what you are talking about.



Tell us something we don't know :-)

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

I don't take the time to read fiction very often. :-)

"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
. ..
I was talking about the thesis/essay Kevin wrote and publish in rec.boats.
It sounded very profession, even if I didn't agree with the message.
Don't
you agree?

; )


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...
Was was talking about the "good work" LOL

"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Thought provoking doesn't qualify or quantify what thoughts it
provokes.
: )


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...
Except for the fact that its assumptions are all wrong...............


"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
...
Kevin,
That is a well written, thought provoking essay. Keep up the good
work.


wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term
"smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts"
that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the
backs
of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions,
with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the
squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health
system
is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want
it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American
Medical
Association (1)

Stating early in the article that the "experiment with market
medicine"
is "a failure", it then goes on to proclaim that "The drive for
profit
is compromising the quality of care, the number of uninsured
persons
is
increasing, those with insurance are increasingly dissatisfied,
bureaucracy is proliferating, and costs are again rapidly
escalating.
We believe national health insurance deserves a second look."

Remember, the Right could never uncover an intelligent reason to
completely destroy Clinton's plan for a national health care
system
nor
could they devise a system to offer in its place themselves (but
all
the Republicans have ever been good at is overturn whatever social
net
exists for the poor). Instead, they played on the average
American's
inability to differentiate between reality and actors mouthing
scripts
and scared the public with those reprehensible "Harry and Louise"
ads
where the two rather poor actors warned about having "Big
Government
in
our medicine cabinets".

Your argument is, thus, a simple one. When even the AMA states
that
we
must revisit the question of a medical health system that covers
every
American, not just those who can afford it, and the best that the
Rabid
Right can offer in rebuttal is a poor imitation of a commercial,
then
it is, indeed, time for the Right to get out of the way of a fair
and
evenhanded healthcare system.

When you hear the arguments about the over regulation of the
pharmaceutical companies, remind them of the horror stories that
are
still being reported about the diabetes drug Rezulin.

Because of the budget cuts forced on the FDA (Food & Drug
Administration) by the Rabid Right at the behest of their
corporate
owners, the agency is forced to curtail the length and extent of
its
testing, putting the drug on its Congressionally mandated "6 month
fast
track" and, as in this case, even allow a physician on the payroll
of
the drug manufacturer to control and direct the testing. This
massive
and, without a doubt, illegal conflict of interest has resulted in
the
deaths of, so far, nearly a hundred Americans and has caused
massive
liver failure in one out of eight of the patients to whom it has
been
prescribed. Even when the evidence was produced that the drug's
safety
was simply too questionable to keep it on the market, the FDA
folded
to
industry pressure and it is still being given to patients with
diabetes
with little or follow-up nor even a warning to physicians that
they
must constantly monitor these patients for the early signs of the
decline in liver functions which inevitably lead to massive liver
failure and a very painful and unnecessary death.

Compare this sorry example of the Rabid Right's notion of
corporate
Nirvana with the episode in Sixties when an FDA physician, Dr.
Francis
O. Kelsey, first delayed, and ultimately withheld, approval of a
proposed sedative meant primarily for pregnant women. Two years
later,
her logical actions, given her many doubts regarding the drug,
were
proven correct when thousands of disfigured newborns were born
worldwide. Members of Congress as well as President Kennedy
honored
her
insight and resolve in protecting the American public from the
drug,
thalidomide.

Would she still have the power or available research to act in
that
fashion these days? Of course not. Would she even have been in a
position to conduct the research which alerted her to the possible
issues that would need to be investigated before placing the drug
for
sale to Americans? Of course not. Should we allow the Rabid Right
to
continue its on going destruction of the FDA? Of course not. It is
our
only protection from the greed and insanity of the Right and their
owners in Corporate America. How much longer it will retain even a
hint
of its former regulatory powers is the only question that will
probably
count, though. (2, 3, 4)

Finally, whenever these self-righteous moral midgets use the term
the
"scandal plagued Clinton Administration", remind them that in the
long
and truly despicable investigation by that little hemorrhoid,
Starr,
and all of his lackeys produced only one, JUST ONE, actual
indictment
and that was of the President lying about an incident that had
absolutely nothing to do with his responsibilities to the office
and
even that mean spirited indictment, although used as the Rabid
Right's
justification for impeachment proceedings, resulted is a "not
guilty"
verdict. The only scandal during these last eighth years has been
the
absolute stupidity and smallness exhibited by the Rabid Right and
their
followers in the conservative media.

Finally, remind them that during the horrors of the Reagan
Administration, nearly four hundred of his appointees were
investigated
and ultimately indicted, with more than a hundred being found
guilty
and serving sentences or paying fines. Just be very certain that
you
are not within reach when you point this little anomaly out to
them,
though, since the Rabid Right hates being confronted with the
truth
about their little sock puppet God.

Well, there are just a couple of the many easily refuted lies and
misleading nonsense that passes for thought among the Rabid Right.
All
that is usually needed to negate any arguments that the Rabid
Right
can
invent is, of course, only a mind capable of independent thought,
a
rare commodity within their ranks.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin. I saw
no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did not use the
words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt even once.

Keep up the good work Kevin. ;-)



There you go...you pretend you're congratulating a poster and then slap
him in the face by calling him a name you know irritates him.
What would your Bishop say about that?

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

"Don White" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial Kevin. I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or dolt
even once.

Keep up the good work Kevin. ;-)



There you go...you pretend you're congratulating a poster and then slap
him in the face by calling him a name you know irritates him.
What would your Bishop say about that?


Preaching again Pastor Don?

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...
DSK wrote in
:

Fred Dehl wrote:
The lowest 50% of wage earners pays just FIVE percent of income taxes.

The lowest 95% of wage earners pays just HALF of all income taxes.


Wrong

I don't think so.

In either case, you can easily go to the IRS web site and
see a nice statistical breakdown of tax burden by income
category.

URL? Didn't think so.

Plus more than HALF the "cost of government" referred to is transfer
payments TO the poor and lower-middle-class.

Really?

Yes.

You mean like the way the Parks Service allows all
those poor people in their $100K motor homes to clog up
Yellowstone & Yosemite and all the other choice pieces of
taxpayer-owned real estate? Like the way the SEC is always
being careful to make sure that wealthy investors & stock
manipulators are not allowed to profit at the expense of
retirement funds?

Check the Parks Service and SEC budgets. Add them together, and compare
to the budget of Medicare. Then shut up.

Don't you love it when liebrals show their true colors- jealousy and envy

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Fred Dehl wrote:
DSK wrote in
:

Fred Dehl wrote:
The lowest 50% of wage earners pays just FIVE percent of income taxes.

The lowest 95% of wage earners pays just HALF of all income taxes.


Wrong

I don't think so.

In either case, you can easily go to the IRS web site and
see a nice statistical breakdown of tax burden by income
category.

URL? Didn't think so.

Plus more than HALF the "cost of government" referred to is transfer
payments TO the poor and lower-middle-class.

Really?

Yes.

You mean like the way the Parks Service allows all
those poor people in their $100K motor homes to clog up
Yellowstone & Yosemite and all the other choice pieces of
taxpayer-owned real estate? Like the way the SEC is always
being careful to make sure that wealthy investors & stock
manipulators are not allowed to profit at the expense of
retirement funds?

Check the Parks Service and SEC budgets. Add them together, and compare
to the budget of Medicare. Then shut up.

Apples and Oranges. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other, so
that's an ignorant statement. Then after such a blunder as that, you
have the audacity to tell someone else to shut up
Precious.......

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial
Kevin.
I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you did
not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole or
dolt
even once.


While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the very
words
you claim offend you.

Why is that?



When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.

Gee, Jim, if that type of thing bothers you, what do you feel about
someone who would post lies about someone's dead mother? How do you
feel about someone who would make degrading remarks about someone's
wife and children? You do just exactly that, you low life scum.


I may have said something about Kevin's mother, wife and children smoking
the weed he grows. Why does that offend you?

YOU, you low life scum said those things about MY dead mother, MY wife,
and MY children. YOU have proven yourself to be the lowest piece of
**** here, Jim. A person just can't go any lower than that. **** you.
Now, do something about that, you worthless little twit.
So, Jim, how come your wife is so greedy that she made you sell your
boat?


Calm down.

Remarks were made about Kevin's mother and wife smoking dope. You said
you talked to Kevin over the weekend about the remarks with Kevin claiming
he would talk to his lawyer to sue me.

So, just what do you know about Kevin's mother and wife smoking dope?
Answer. Nothing. Pure ignorance on your part, huh? Admit it.

I did, however, say that I think your kids are being greedy for asking for a
bike, iPod, Nintendo, PS2 and other things for Christmas, with the list,
according to you, growing longer every day.

If that offends you.........tough.

Your wife is greedy for making you sell your boat for her. And yes, I
think that ANYBODY who would bring someone's, ANYONE'S mother, or kids
into a conversation is nothing short of a low life scum. It has nothing
to do with "offending" me. You are just scum. Just a nasty little gnat
like piece of ****. To make matters worse, I'm sure you lied about your
wife saying that she thought it was okay for you to act in this manner.
No woman would approve of her husband acting like you, unless she, too
is a low life.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Kevin,

From memory, I don't think JimH ever said his wife wanted him to or made him
sell his boat. I remember him saying due to health reasons he was selling
the boat. Even if she wanted him to sell the boat for selfish reason, I
commend JimH for helping his wife through a very difficult time. A chronic
illness if very difficult for the sick person and their it might be even
more difficult on the family.

The same as I was impressed when Don had his mother move in, so he could
take care of her when she could not take care of herself, I was impressed
when JimH made his wife's health his number one concern. It was obvious,
that he enjoyed boating, and spent every weekend on the boat. Sometimes,
you just have to be willing to think of others, and not only yourself.

I for one believe JimH is a better person and his sacrifice will actually
help him through his wife's illness. I also believe in Karma.




wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial
Kevin.
I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you
did
not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole
or
dolt
even once.


While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the
very
words
you claim offend you.

Why is that?



When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.

Gee, Jim, if that type of thing bothers you, what do you feel about
someone who would post lies about someone's dead mother? How do you
feel about someone who would make degrading remarks about someone's
wife and children? You do just exactly that, you low life scum.


I may have said something about Kevin's mother, wife and children
smoking
the weed he grows. Why does that offend you?

YOU, you low life scum said those things about MY dead mother, MY wife,
and MY children. YOU have proven yourself to be the lowest piece of
**** here, Jim. A person just can't go any lower than that. **** you.
Now, do something about that, you worthless little twit.
So, Jim, how come your wife is so greedy that she made you sell your
boat?


Calm down.

Remarks were made about Kevin's mother and wife smoking dope. You
said
you talked to Kevin over the weekend about the remarks with Kevin
claiming
he would talk to his lawyer to sue me.

So, just what do you know about Kevin's mother and wife smoking dope?
Answer. Nothing. Pure ignorance on your part, huh? Admit it.

I did, however, say that I think your kids are being greedy for asking
for a
bike, iPod, Nintendo, PS2 and other things for Christmas, with the list,
according to you, growing longer every day.

If that offends you.........tough.

Your wife is greedy for making you sell your boat for her. And yes, I
think that ANYBODY who would bring someone's, ANYONE'S mother, or kids
into a conversation is nothing short of a low life scum. It has nothing
to do with "offending" me. You are just scum. Just a nasty little gnat
like piece of ****. To make matters worse, I'm sure you lied about your
wife saying that she thought it was okay for you to act in this manner.
No woman would approve of her husband acting like you, unless she, too
is a low life.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Wow, kevin thinks he and Harry are low life scum.......he finally got
something right.

"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
. ..
Kevin,

From memory, I don't think JimH ever said his wife wanted him to or made
him
sell his boat. I remember him saying due to health reasons he was selling
the boat. Even if she wanted him to sell the boat for selfish reason, I
commend JimH for helping his wife through a very difficult time. A
chronic
illness if very difficult for the sick person and their it might be even
more difficult on the family.

The same as I was impressed when Don had his mother move in, so he could
take care of her when she could not take care of herself, I was impressed
when JimH made his wife's health his number one concern. It was obvious,
that he enjoyed boating, and spent every weekend on the boat. Sometimes,
you just have to be willing to think of others, and not only yourself.

I for one believe JimH is a better person and his sacrifice will actually
help him through his wife's illness. I also believe in Karma.




wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial
Kevin.
I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see
you
did
not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole
or
dolt
even once.


While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the
very
words
you claim offend you.

Why is that?



When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.

Gee, Jim, if that type of thing bothers you, what do you feel
about
someone who would post lies about someone's dead mother? How do
you
feel about someone who would make degrading remarks about
someone's
wife and children? You do just exactly that, you low life scum.


I may have said something about Kevin's mother, wife and children
smoking
the weed he grows. Why does that offend you?

YOU, you low life scum said those things about MY dead mother, MY
wife,
and MY children. YOU have proven yourself to be the lowest piece of
**** here, Jim. A person just can't go any lower than that. **** you.
Now, do something about that, you worthless little twit.
So, Jim, how come your wife is so greedy that she made you sell your
boat?


Calm down.

Remarks were made about Kevin's mother and wife smoking dope. You
said
you talked to Kevin over the weekend about the remarks with Kevin
claiming
he would talk to his lawyer to sue me.

So, just what do you know about Kevin's mother and wife smoking dope?
Answer. Nothing. Pure ignorance on your part, huh? Admit it.

I did, however, say that I think your kids are being greedy for asking
for a
bike, iPod, Nintendo, PS2 and other things for Christmas, with the
list,
according to you, growing longer every day.

If that offends you.........tough.

Your wife is greedy for making you sell your boat for her. And yes, I
think that ANYBODY who would bring someone's, ANYONE'S mother, or kids
into a conversation is nothing short of a low life scum. It has nothing
to do with "offending" me. You are just scum. Just a nasty little gnat
like piece of ****. To make matters worse, I'm sure you lied about your
wife saying that she thought it was okay for you to act in this manner.
No woman would approve of her husband acting like you, unless she, too
is a low life.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Wm Shakespeare Smithers wrote:
Kevin,

From memory, I don't think JimH ever said his wife wanted him to or made him
sell his boat. I remember him saying due to health reasons he was selling
the boat. Even if she wanted him to sell the boat for selfish reason, I
commend JimH for helping his wife through a very difficult time. A chronic
illness if very difficult for the sick person and their it might be even
more difficult on the family.

I'm not Kevin, dip****.

You aren't any more of a man than Jim if you condone his actions. He
has repeatedly said nasty things about my dead mother, my wife, and now
even my children. Do you find that an act of Jim's that you would
"commend" also? He, and now you, chime in about his wife's illness. I
find it amazing that you and he think that because of that, it is a
taboo thing to say anything about, BUT, you find it quite acceptable to
say ****ty things about my children, my wife, and my dead mother. If
you agree with his actions then you are as classless as he is.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Paul,
In the Christmas spirit, I am refraining from commenting on Kevin's
summation of anyone who would make fun of JimH and his wife.


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...
Wow, kevin thinks he and Harry are low life scum.......he finally got
something right.

"Wm Shakespeare Smithers" The WordSmith wrote in message
. ..
Kevin,

From memory, I don't think JimH ever said his wife wanted him to or made
him
sell his boat. I remember him saying due to health reasons he was
selling
the boat. Even if she wanted him to sell the boat for selfish reason, I
commend JimH for helping his wife through a very difficult time. A
chronic
illness if very difficult for the sick person and their it might be even
more difficult on the family.

The same as I was impressed when Don had his mother move in, so he could
take care of her when she could not take care of herself, I was
impressed
when JimH made his wife's health his number one concern. It was obvious,
that he enjoyed boating, and spent every weekend on the boat.
Sometimes,
you just have to be willing to think of others, and not only yourself.

I for one believe JimH is a better person and his sacrifice will actually
help him through his wife's illness. I also believe in Karma.




wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written
editorial
Kevin.
I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see
you
did
not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****,
asshole
or
dolt
even once.


While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the
very
words
you claim offend you.

Why is that?



When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.

Gee, Jim, if that type of thing bothers you, what do you feel
about
someone who would post lies about someone's dead mother? How do
you
feel about someone who would make degrading remarks about
someone's
wife and children? You do just exactly that, you low life scum.


I may have said something about Kevin's mother, wife and children
smoking
the weed he grows. Why does that offend you?

YOU, you low life scum said those things about MY dead mother, MY
wife,
and MY children. YOU have proven yourself to be the lowest piece of
**** here, Jim. A person just can't go any lower than that. ****
you.
Now, do something about that, you worthless little twit.
So, Jim, how come your wife is so greedy that she made you sell your
boat?


Calm down.

Remarks were made about Kevin's mother and wife smoking dope. You
said
you talked to Kevin over the weekend about the remarks with Kevin
claiming
he would talk to his lawyer to sue me.

So, just what do you know about Kevin's mother and wife smoking dope?
Answer. Nothing. Pure ignorance on your part, huh? Admit it.

I did, however, say that I think your kids are being greedy for asking
for a
bike, iPod, Nintendo, PS2 and other things for Christmas, with the
list,
according to you, growing longer every day.

If that offends you.........tough.

Your wife is greedy for making you sell your boat for her. And yes, I
think that ANYBODY who would bring someone's, ANYONE'S mother, or kids
into a conversation is nothing short of a low life scum. It has nothing
to do with "offending" me. You are just scum. Just a nasty little gnat
like piece of ****. To make matters worse, I'm sure you lied about your
wife saying that she thought it was okay for you to act in this manner.
No woman would approve of her husband acting like you, unless she, too
is a low life.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Kevin,

I was only commenting on someone who would give up something important to
themselves (i.e. JimH's boat and DonW's privacy) to help someone else. Both
of them were very selfish, and I commend that. As much as Don loves his
Mom, I am sure he gave up a lot to have her move into his home. The same
with JimH and his boat.

If you remember both of these comments were made in passing, and were not
requests for accolades or sympathy. I seriously doubt either one of them
thought about it at all. I didn't even mention it at the time, but it did
make an impression on me. I only mentioned DonW's selfless act, when
someone made a derogatory comment about Don living with his mother, and I
only commented on JimH's situation when someone made fun of the fact that he
was boatless.




wrote in message
oups.com...

Wm Shakespeare Smithers wrote:
Kevin,

From memory, I don't think JimH ever said his wife wanted him to or made
him
sell his boat. I remember him saying due to health reasons he was
selling
the boat. Even if she wanted him to sell the boat for selfish reason, I
commend JimH for helping his wife through a very difficult time. A
chronic
illness if very difficult for the sick person and their it might be even
more difficult on the family.

I'm not Kevin, dip****.

You aren't any more of a man than Jim if you condone his actions. He
has repeatedly said nasty things about my dead mother, my wife, and now
even my children. Do you find that an act of Jim's that you would
"commend" also? He, and now you, chime in about his wife's illness. I
find it amazing that you and he think that because of that, it is a
taboo thing to say anything about, BUT, you find it quite acceptable to
say ****ty things about my children, my wife, and my dead mother. If
you agree with his actions then you are as classless as he is.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
Although I disagree with it, that was a well written editorial
Kevin.
I
saw no cussing or personal attacks in your post. I also see you
did
not
use the words idiot, ignorant, dumb, dumbass, dip****, asshole
or
dolt
even once.


While I don't object to cussing, you do. Yet you republish the
very
words
you claim offend you.

Why is that?



When they are used to attack or degrade a person they offend me.

Gee, Jim, if that type of thing bothers you, what do you feel about
someone who would post lies about someone's dead mother? How do you
feel about someone who would make degrading remarks about someone's
wife and children? You do just exactly that, you low life scum.


I may have said something about Kevin's mother, wife and children
smoking
the weed he grows. Why does that offend you?

YOU, you low life scum said those things about MY dead mother, MY wife,
and MY children. YOU have proven yourself to be the lowest piece of
**** here, Jim. A person just can't go any lower than that. **** you.
Now, do something about that, you worthless little twit.
So, Jim, how come your wife is so greedy that she made you sell your
boat?


Calm down.

Remarks were made about Kevin's mother and wife smoking dope. You
said
you talked to Kevin over the weekend about the remarks with Kevin
claiming
he would talk to his lawyer to sue me.

So, just what do you know about Kevin's mother and wife smoking dope?
Answer. Nothing. Pure ignorance on your part, huh? Admit it.

I did, however, say that I think your kids are being greedy for asking
for a
bike, iPod, Nintendo, PS2 and other things for Christmas, with the list,
according to you, growing longer every day.

If that offends you.........tough.

Your wife is greedy for making you sell your boat for her. And yes, I
think that ANYBODY who would bring someone's, ANYONE'S mother, or kids
into a conversation is nothing short of a low life scum. It has nothing
to do with "offending" me. You are just scum. Just a nasty little gnat
like piece of ****. To make matters worse, I'm sure you lied about your
wife saying that she thought it was okay for you to act in this manner.
No woman would approve of her husband acting like you, unless she, too
is a low life.


When you see Kevin next weekend to discuss the things I said about his
mother and wife, tell him happy anniversary for me.....I think it was one
year last November.

Kevin sent me a picture taken on his wedding day. We have it framed and
sitting on a shelf in our family room.

http://tinyurl.com/5mel5

Tell Kevin my wife says congratulations also.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

The lowest 50% of wage earners pays just FIVE percent of income taxes.

The lowest 95% of wage earners pays just HALF of all income taxes.


Wrong


Fred Dehl wrote:
I don't think so.


It doesn't matter what you "think."
Facts are facts.



.. you can easily go to the IRS web site and
see a nice statistical breakdown of tax burden by income
category.


URL? Didn't think so.

Ever heard of Google? Why should I do your homework for you?



Check the Parks Service and SEC budgets. Add them together, and compare
to the budget of Medicare.

Let's see, who benefits from Medicare?
Drug companies? check
Medicare bureaucrats? check
Lobbyists? check
Elected officials and their publicity flacks? check

Retired old poor people? Yes, but only if they wait in line
and fill out a lot of paperwork and endure many hours of
frustration & aggravation and make sure that every single
'i' is dotted and pay their taxes on time and are willing to
rely on inefficient sub-standard service.

... Then shut up.

What an intelligent well-reasoned thing to say. It certainly
appears that you have a fair & balanced view of things.

DSK

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Fred Dehl wrote:


But you really don't mind making the old folks suffer, do you, as long as
they're duped into voting for the socialist morons you favor for office?

Who's out there turning over the rocks and letting these characters loose?

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Fred Dehl wrote:
Without backup for your claim,

You're the one that made a bogus claim.

It has been discussed here many times, and the facts are
easy to discover *if* you're interested in facts instead of
wild propaganda.


.... You claim to know the homepage from
which the data can be found, and also state that the exact page is
"easily" found. So, I will ask again:

URL?

Do you know how to spell "I R S"?
If so, type that into Google and ask them for a breakdown of
tax payments related to income brackets.

The tax burden is not skewed by income more than about 5%
(ie those receiving 50% of the income pay approx 55% of the
taxes). Is that simple enough for you?

You can ask your right-wing Christian buddy NOBBY if that is
true, because he and I went round-and-round on this very
issue not long ago. Were you absent from school that day?



But you really don't mind making the old folks suffer, do you, as long as
they're duped into voting for the socialist morons you favor for office?

You don't have a clue whom I "favor for office" so you must
be just making stupid blanket statements for fun. Thanks for
playing, bye bye now.

DSK

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American Medical
Association (1)

Do most liberals sleep through Economics 101 in college? It sure sounds this
way.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Let's see, who benefits from Medicare?
Drug companies? check
Medicare bureaucrats? check
Lobbyists? check
Elected officials and their publicity flacks? check


Fred Dehl wrote:
Since it benefits all these people and corporations you hate, I take it
you've endorsed its elimination, as I have?


Actually, I wouldn't have a problem with eliminating
Medicare. What I *do* have a problem with is fascist
boneheads spouting their propaganda, as though their
favorite politicians are actually accomplishing something.

Has the Bush/Cheney Administration taken any steps toward
reducing Medicare, hmmm? Wait, lemme guess... you're a
"libertarian" and will claim you didn't vote for Bush/Cheney...

DSK

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

"Dan J.S." wrote in message
...

wrote in message
oups.com...
Want to have some ammunition the next time a conservative begins
talking about this sick drive toward what they like to term "smaller
government" when they actually mean a government that kneels in
supplication before Corporate America while passing tax "cuts" that
just transfer the cost of government from the wealthy onto the backs of
the middle-class and poor? Well, here are just a few questions, with
supporting examples, to pose and then watch them squirm (the squirm
part is the one I like best)
First, for those who state that the Canadian national health system is
a bad idea and that the "market" will keep the costs of medical
coverage low and that the American medical community doesn't want it
even discussed, call their bluff with this little quote from the
premier medical journal of the AMA, the Journal of the American Medical
Association (1)

Do most liberals sleep through Economics 101 in college? It sure sounds
this
way.



They never take it to begin with, they are too bogged down with womyn's
studies and other such nonsense.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...
DSK wrote in
:

Fred Dehl wrote:
The lowest 50% of wage earners pays just FIVE percent of income taxes.

The lowest 95% of wage earners pays just HALF of all income taxes.


Wrong

I don't think so.

In either case, you can easily go to the IRS web site and
see a nice statistical breakdown of tax burden by income
category.

URL? Didn't think so.


http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/250.html

Table 6 clearly shows that from 1980 to 2003 there has been a major shift of
the tax burden to the top 10%
And that while the top marginal rate dropped from 70% to 36 %



Plus more than HALF the "cost of government" referred to is transfer
payments TO the poor and lower-middle-class.

Really?

Yes.

You mean like the way the Parks Service allows all
those poor people in their $100K motor homes to clog up
Yellowstone & Yosemite and all the other choice pieces of
taxpayer-owned real estate? Like the way the SEC is always
being careful to make sure that wealthy investors & stock
manipulators are not allowed to profit at the expense of
retirement funds?

Check the Parks Service and SEC budgets. Add them together, and compare
to the budget of Medicare. Then shut up.

OT Easy Answers to Conservative Lies
 

Fred Dehl wrote:
Let's review:

1. *I* stated:

Plus more than HALF the "cost of government" referred to is
transfer payments TO the poor and lower-middle-class.

2. *YOU* attempted to counter with references to the Parks Service and
SEC.


Wrong again.

Let's review, indeed... only with the facts.

*You* made an incorrect assertion about taxes.

*I* pointed out your mistake, and suggested ways in which
you could easily find out the truth. I included an
easy-to-understand analogy about gov't services, which went
right over your head.

*You* responded with a series of knee-jerk assumptions,
further incorrect statements, and insults.



Then after such a blunder as that,
you have the audacity to tell someone else to shut up


Sorry. That should have been 'shut the **** up, asshole'. Happy now?

Not really. Kind of disappoined, if anything. I keep hoping
that someday, a Bush/Cheney supporter with some tiny degree
of intelligence & manners will appear.

Hey NOYB & Tom, you all ready to take this guy back to
clubhouse yet?

DSK

Conservative Lies... taxes
 

How about them apples? Pee-Fritz is contributing something
besides "yeah, me too!"
Way to go Fritzy!

P Fritz wrote:
http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/250.html

Table 6 clearly shows that from 1980 to 2003 there has been a major shift of
the tax burden to the top 10%

How do you figure that?
If you look at the *preceeding* tables, you can see that the
top 10% share of income has increased faster than their
share of the tax burden.... more than a 30% increase in
share from 1980 onward.

And you really need look no further than Table 1 (although
this disagrees with the IRS figures I recall, no need to
quibble here)



Fred Dehl wrote:

The lowest 50% of wage earners pays just FIVE percent of income taxes.


Actually, less than that. But then, their share of the
income is only 14%. Should they be paying 50% of the tax
burden with only 14% of the income, as you try to imply?

Gee, that's fair.

DSK