OT - The party of the rich is...
 

"HK" wrote in message
...


Or are you saying that because al Qaeda tortures, it is ok for us to do
so,too?

It's hard for me to equate 20-30 seconds of a drowning-like experience that
you walk away from as "torture" compared to having your throat slit and head
lopped off in front of a camera while pleading for your life.

There have been many, many more civilians and solders beheaded by al Qaeda
than al Qaeda terrorists waterboarded by us, if the CIA report is accurate.

Yes, if waterboarding gains information that helps prevent more beheadings
or torture killings by al Qaeda, I think it's not only ok, it's necessary.

Eisboch

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

Or are you saying that because al Qaeda tortures, it is ok for us to do
so,too?

It's hard for me to equate 20-30 seconds of a drowning-like experience that
you walk away from as "torture" compared to having your throat slit and head
lopped off in front of a camera while pleading for your life.

There have been many, many more civilians and solders beheaded by al Qaeda
than al Qaeda terrorists waterboarded by us, if the CIA report is accurate.

Yes, if waterboarding gains information that helps prevent more beheadings
or torture killings by al Qaeda, I think it's not only ok, it's necessary.

Eisboch




I certainly can accept that we have different opinions on this, and that
neither of us is going to convince the other to change his mind.

On a lighter note, I passed my cardiovascular exam today. Pressure cuffs
on both arms and legs, hooked up to a very expensive looking computer
device, plus ultrasound through my midsection and up through my neck.
Very strange to see the inside of ones "stuff." Three very attractive
young women were doing the testing (one was a trainee), which made the
experience even easier.

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

On a lighter note, I passed my cardiovascular exam today. Pressure cuffs
on both arms and legs, hooked up to a very expensive looking computer
device, plus ultrasound through my midsection and up through my neck. Very
strange to see the inside of ones "stuff." Three very attractive young
women were doing the testing (one was a trainee), which made the
experience even easier.


So, not exactly a "waterboarding" experience after all, huh? :-)

Good to hear that you'll be around to aggravate us "righties" a little
longer.

Eisboch




There are righties and there are righties. I have no problems whatsoever
with responsible righties. You and a few others here are in that group.

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

On a lighter note, I passed my cardiovascular exam today. Pressure
cuffs on both arms and legs, hooked up to a very expensive looking
computer device, plus ultrasound through my midsection and up through
my neck. Very strange to see the inside of ones "stuff." Three very
attractive young women were doing the testing (one was a trainee),
which made the experience even easier.


So, not exactly a "waterboarding" experience after all, huh? :-)

Good to hear that you'll be around to aggravate us "righties" a little
longer.

Eisboch



There are righties and there are righties. I have no problems whatsoever
with responsible righties. You and a few others here are in that group.

Eisboch,
I want to join that elite club of responsible righties, what do I need
to do? Is there a pledge or a list of requirements?

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message
. ..
HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

On a lighter note, I passed my cardiovascular exam today. Pressure
cuffs on both arms and legs, hooked up to a very expensive looking
computer device, plus ultrasound through my midsection and up through
my neck. Very strange to see the inside of ones "stuff." Three very
attractive young women were doing the testing (one was a trainee),
which made the experience even easier.


So, not exactly a "waterboarding" experience after all, huh? :-)

Good to hear that you'll be around to aggravate us "righties" a little
longer.

Eisboch



There are righties and there are righties. I have no problems whatsoever
with responsible righties. You and a few others here are in that group.

Eisboch,
I want to join that elite club of responsible righties, what do I need to
do? Is there a pledge or a list of requirements?


Beats me.

Eisboch

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 20:53:40 -0500, HK wrote:

D.Duck wrote:
"JimH" wrote in message
...
"D.Duck" wrote in message
...
"HK" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's
pretty viable as an alternative.
I also have a lot of respect for McCain. His only drawback is 25
years in the Senate.

Eisboch

Not me. He has a short fuse and he carries many liberal views,
including wanting to do away with waterboarding the captured
terrorists, even though even 30 seconds of doing so to high profile
terrorists resulted in tremendous information.

As you said, he is also long in the tooth and represents the same old
same old.

The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this
election.

Being in favor of torture is a conservative view?

No wonder I don't like conservatives.
Serious question. I don't know much about waterboarding. Does it leave
any lasting physical or physiological effects?

Nope. It has proven to be effective within 30 seconds and has resulted in
solid information that resulted in stopping future terrorist attacks.

Torture? Nope.........but very effective according to reports on the use
of this technique on captured terrorists.


I've done some quick reading via Google and so far all I've found is
opinions that there can be lasting effects.




The conservatives who support waterboard don't give a damn about that,
and, of course, they are in denial about its impact, too.

I'd be happy to see waterboarding approved right after the entire Bush
and Cheney families subject themselves to it and tell us it is no biggie.

Various reporters have undergone waterboarding and don't seem to be any the
worse for it.
--
John H

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 02:16:09 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 20:48:05 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote:


"JimH" wrote in message
. ..

"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's
pretty viable as an alternative.
I also have a lot of respect for McCain. His only drawback is 25
years in the Senate.

Not me. He has a short fuse and he carries many liberal views,
including wanting to do away with waterboarding the captured
terrorists, even though even 30 seconds of doing so to high profile
terrorists resulted in tremendous information.

As you said, he is also long in the tooth and represents the same old
same old.

The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this
election.

Being in favor of torture is a conservative view?

No wonder I don't like conservatives.

Serious question. I don't know much about waterboarding. Does it leave
any lasting physical or physiological effects?

Nope. It has proven to be effective within 30 seconds and has resulted in
solid information that resulted in stopping future terrorist attacks.

Torture? Nope.........but very effective according to reports on the use
of this technique on captured terrorists.

I've done some quick reading via Google and so far all I've found is
opinions that there can be lasting effects.

No offense guys, but...well, no other way to put it, it's been part of
military escape and evasion courses since the '70s.

As to "lasting effects" - eh - minor at best.

We had a big metal box with snakes in it. Probably garter snakes, but scary
as hell nevertheless.

I was lucky. I didn't get caught.
--
John H

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 20:53:40 -0500, HK wrote:

D.Duck wrote:
"JimH" wrote in message
...
"D.Duck" wrote in message
...
"HK" wrote in message
...
JimH wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

I've always been a McCain fan and if he can keep it together, he's
pretty viable as an alternative.
I also have a lot of respect for McCain. His only drawback is 25
years in the Senate.

Eisboch

Not me. He has a short fuse and he carries many liberal views,
including wanting to do away with waterboarding the captured
terrorists, even though even 30 seconds of doing so to high profile
terrorists resulted in tremendous information.

As you said, he is also long in the tooth and represents the same
old
same old.

The Republicans did not offer any true conservative candidates this
election.

Being in favor of torture is a conservative view?

No wonder I don't like conservatives.
Serious question. I don't know much about waterboarding. Does it
leave
any lasting physical or physiological effects?

Nope. It has proven to be effective within 30 seconds and has resulted
in
solid information that resulted in stopping future terrorist attacks.

Torture? Nope.........but very effective according to reports on the
use
of this technique on captured terrorists.


I've done some quick reading via Google and so far all I've found is
opinions that there can be lasting effects.




The conservatives who support waterboard don't give a damn about that,
and, of course, they are in denial about its impact, too.

I'd be happy to see waterboarding approved right after the entire Bush
and Cheney families subject themselves to it and tell us it is no biggie.

Various reporters have undergone waterboarding and don't seem to be any
the
worse for it.
--
John H

Krause seems to think torture is sinful except when applied to Republicans.
Go figure. He's a piece of work.

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

Concerning Obama being a "Credit to his race" , I'm kind of wondering
what "credit" to which "race" Harry was talking about.

The man's mom is caucasian, and his dad in negroid.

PLUS, many talking heads were wondering if Obama was "black"
enough....


hmmmmm.

What a load.



Lu Powell wrote:

Did you read Harry's comment about Obama being a credit to his race?


"A credit to his race"...is a racist statement. Next thing, Harry will
declare some of his best friends are Black. The Clintons want to credit
Obama's wins to the Black vote. Yeah, there's a slew of Black voters in
Idaho, Colorado, Kansas, etc.

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

Tim wrote:
Concerning Obama being a "Credit to his race" , I'm kind of wondering
what "credit" to which "race" Harry was talking about.

The man's mom is caucasian, and his dad in negroid.

PLUS, many talking heads were wondering if Obama was "black"
enough....


hmmmmm.

What a load.



Lu Powell wrote:

Did you read Harry's comment about Obama being a credit to his race?

"A credit to his race"...is a racist statement. Next thing, Harry will
declare some of his best friends are Black. The Clintons want to credit
Obama's wins to the Black vote. Yeah, there's a slew of Black voters in
Idaho, Colorado, Kansas, etc.


I never said Obama was a "credit to his race."

Nice try, though, a**holes.

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

Eisboch wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message
. ..
HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

On a lighter note, I passed my cardiovascular exam today. Pressure
cuffs on both arms and legs, hooked up to a very expensive looking
computer device, plus ultrasound through my midsection and up through
my neck. Very strange to see the inside of ones "stuff." Three very
attractive young women were doing the testing (one was a trainee),
which made the experience even easier.

So, not exactly a "waterboarding" experience after all, huh? :-)

Good to hear that you'll be around to aggravate us "righties" a little
longer.

Eisboch


There are righties and there are righties. I have no problems whatsoever
with responsible righties. You and a few others here are in that group.
Eisboch,
I want to join that elite club of responsible righties, what do I need to
do? Is there a pledge or a list of requirements?


Beats me.

Eisboch

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

Tim wrote:
Concerning Obama being a "Credit to his race" , I'm kind of wondering
what "credit" to which "race" Harry was talking about.

The man's mom is caucasian, and his dad in negroid.

PLUS, many talking heads were wondering if Obama was "black"
enough....


hmmmmm.

What a load.



Lu Powell wrote:

Did you read Harry's comment about Obama being a credit to his race?

"A credit to his race"...is a racist statement. Next thing, Harry will
declare some of his best friends are Black. The Clintons want to credit
Obama's wins to the Black vote. Yeah, there's a slew of Black voters in
Idaho, Colorado, Kansas, etc.

Harry must have meant that he was a credit to both the black and white
race, and since he was exposed to both Christianity and Muslims he is a
credit to both the Christians and Muslims also.

The Billary supporters are ****ting in the pants because Billary is
competing against someone with vision who is getting the young voters
excited about a candidate. It looks like only the old senile democrats
are supporting Billary.

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message
. ..
HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

On a lighter note, I passed my cardiovascular exam today. Pressure
cuffs on both arms and legs, hooked up to a very expensive looking
computer device, plus ultrasound through my midsection and up through
my neck. Very strange to see the inside of ones "stuff." Three very
attractive young women were doing the testing (one was a trainee),
which made the experience even easier.


So, not exactly a "waterboarding" experience after all, huh? :-)

Good to hear that you'll be around to aggravate us "righties" a little
longer.

Eisboch



There are righties and there are righties. I have no problems whatsoever
with responsible righties. You and a few others here are in that group.

Eisboch,
I want to join that elite club of responsible righties, what do I need to
do? Is there a pledge or a list of requirements?


Beats me.

Eisboch


Waylon could start by straightening up and flying right.
No one is a lost cause... well maybe Dingy Dan and Bertie.

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Feb 6, 9:56*pm, HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

Or are you saying that because al Qaeda tortures, it is ok for us to do
so,too?

It's hard for me to equate 20-30 seconds of a drowning-like experience that
you walk away from as "torture" compared to having your throat slit and head
lopped off in front of a camera while pleading for your life.

There have been many, many more civilians and solders beheaded by al Qaeda
than al Qaeda terrorists waterboarded by us, if the CIA report is accurate.

Yes, if waterboarding gains information that helps prevent more beheadings
or torture killings by al Qaeda, I think it's not only ok, it's necessary.

Eisboch

I certainly can accept that we have different opinions on this, and that
neither of us is going to convince the other to change his mind.

On a lighter note, I passed my cardiovascular exam today. Pressure cuffs
on both arms and legs, hooked up to a very expensive looking computer
device, plus ultrasound through my midsection and up through my neck.
Very strange to see the inside of ones "stuff." Three very attractive
young women were doing the testing (one was a trainee), which made the
experience even easier.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, of course you had attractive nurses. They know that you are far
superior to anyone else on earth so they give you the beauties. Did
you tell them about your Dr. Dr. wife?

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

"hk" wrote in message
...
Tim wrote:
Concerning Obama being a "Credit to his race" , I'm kind of wondering
what "credit" to which "race" Harry was talking about.

The man's mom is caucasian, and his dad in negroid.

PLUS, many talking heads were wondering if Obama was "black"
enough....


hmmmmm.

What a load.



Lu Powell wrote:

Did you read Harry's comment about Obama being a credit to his
race?

"A credit to his race"...is a racist statement. Next thing, Harry
will
declare some of his best friends are Black. The Clintons want to
credit
Obama's wins to the Black vote. Yeah, there's a slew of Black voters
in
Idaho, Colorado, Kansas, etc.


I never said Obama was a "credit to his race."

Nice try, though, a**holes.

Did so. Personal attacks from you are a real badge of honor....

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

Don White wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message
. ..
HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

On a lighter note, I passed my cardiovascular exam today. Pressure
cuffs on both arms and legs, hooked up to a very expensive looking
computer device, plus ultrasound through my midsection and up through
my neck. Very strange to see the inside of ones "stuff." Three very
attractive young women were doing the testing (one was a trainee),
which made the experience even easier.

So, not exactly a "waterboarding" experience after all, huh? :-)

Good to hear that you'll be around to aggravate us "righties" a little
longer.

Eisboch


There are righties and there are righties. I have no problems whatsoever
with responsible righties. You and a few others here are in that group.
Eisboch,
I want to join that elite club of responsible righties, what do I need to
do? Is there a pledge or a list of requirements?

Beats me.

Eisboch


Waylon could start by straightening up and flying right.
No one is a lost cause... well maybe Dingy Dan and Bertie.



Please my name is Reginald. Now you can call my Reginald, you can call
me Reggie, you can call me R.S., you can call me Mr. Smithers, you can
call me RS the 3rd, you can call me R Trey, but whatever you do, please
do not call me Waylon.

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

Lu Powell wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
...
Tim wrote:
Concerning Obama being a "Credit to his race" , I'm kind of wondering
what "credit" to which "race" Harry was talking about.

The man's mom is caucasian, and his dad in negroid.

PLUS, many talking heads were wondering if Obama was "black"
enough....


hmmmmm.

What a load.



Lu Powell wrote:

Did you read Harry's comment about Obama being a credit to his
race?

"A credit to his race"...is a racist statement. Next thing, Harry
will
declare some of his best friends are Black. The Clintons want to
credit
Obama's wins to the Black vote. Yeah, there's a slew of Black voters
in
Idaho, Colorado, Kansas, etc.

I never said Obama was a "credit to his race."

Nice try, though, a**holes.

Did so. Personal attacks from you are a real badge of honor....



Why does Harry keep changing his handle in rec.boats?

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 10:38:39 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is
Here wrote:

Lu Powell wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
...
Tim wrote:
Concerning Obama being a "Credit to his race" , I'm kind of wondering
what "credit" to which "race" Harry was talking about.

The man's mom is caucasian, and his dad in negroid.

PLUS, many talking heads were wondering if Obama was "black"
enough....


hmmmmm.

What a load.



Lu Powell wrote:

Did you read Harry's comment about Obama being a credit to his
race?

"A credit to his race"...is a racist statement. Next thing, Harry
will
declare some of his best friends are Black. The Clintons want to
credit
Obama's wins to the Black vote. Yeah, there's a slew of Black voters
in
Idaho, Colorado, Kansas, etc.

I never said Obama was a "credit to his race."

Nice try, though, a**holes.

Did so. Personal attacks from you are a real badge of honor....



Why does Harry keep changing his handle in rec.boats?

Statistics.

But he'll say it's 'cause he's on one of his half dozen other 'puters.
--
John H

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 09:38:34 -0500, hk wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message
. ..
HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

On a lighter note, I passed my cardiovascular exam today. Pressure
cuffs on both arms and legs, hooked up to a very expensive looking
computer device, plus ultrasound through my midsection and up through
my neck. Very strange to see the inside of ones "stuff." Three very
attractive young women were doing the testing (one was a trainee),
which made the experience even easier.

So, not exactly a "waterboarding" experience after all, huh? :-)

Good to hear that you'll be around to aggravate us "righties" a little
longer.

Eisboch


There are righties and there are righties. I have no problems whatsoever
with responsible righties. You and a few others here are in that group.
Eisboch,
I want to join that elite club of responsible righties, what do I need to
do? Is there a pledge or a list of requirements?


Beats me.

Eisboch




Wealth.
--
John H

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 10:32:04 -0500, HK wrote:

wrote:
On Feb 6, 9:56 pm, HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
Or are you saying that because al Qaeda tortures, it is ok for us to do
so,too?
It's hard for me to equate 20-30 seconds of a drowning-like experience that
you walk away from as "torture" compared to having your throat slit and head
lopped off in front of a camera while pleading for your life.
There have been many, many more civilians and solders beheaded by al Qaeda
than al Qaeda terrorists waterboarded by us, if the CIA report is accurate.
Yes, if waterboarding gains information that helps prevent more beheadings
or torture killings by al Qaeda, I think it's not only ok, it's necessary.
Eisboch
I certainly can accept that we have different opinions on this, and that
neither of us is going to convince the other to change his mind.

On a lighter note, I passed my cardiovascular exam today. Pressure cuffs
on both arms and legs, hooked up to a very expensive looking computer
device, plus ultrasound through my midsection and up through my neck.
Very strange to see the inside of ones "stuff." Three very attractive
young women were doing the testing (one was a trainee), which made the
experience even easier.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, of course you had attractive nurses. They know that you are far
superior to anyone else on earth so they give you the beauties. Did
you tell them about your Dr. Dr. wife?


There you go again, dip****. Who said they were nurses? Who said they
were "beauties"? Not me. All I said was that there were three very
attractive young women doing the testing. In point of fact, I doubt any
of them were RNs, or, in fact, nurses of any kind. They weren't doing
triage, they weren't administering meds, they weren't treating an
ailment, or injured or sick patients.

This is the sort of misreading that keeps getting you into trouble.

Like most liberals, you dodged the question.
--
John H

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Feb 6, 1:10�pm, Tim wrote:
I wonder if they are the ones buying up all the Grand Banks?



A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer
taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing
jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said.- Hide quoted text -


Hardly. Families with a total household income of $200k aren't in a
realistic position to dump well over $1mm into a boat. At 6.75 APR,
payments on a $1mm balance for 15 years are $8850 a month. Stretching
to 20 years drops the note to $7600. In either case, that boat is
going to cost soemthing close to $10,000 a month all in, all done,
before it ever leaves the dock. That would be 60% of the gross income
of a $200k per year family, and maybe 70-75% of spendable net.

Paying cash simply creates an opportunity cost instead of interest
expense. The amount of money $1mm could earn in a low or moderate risk
investment then becomes the "cost" of buying a relatively pricey boat.

If anybody asked my financial advice (and nobody does) I'd suggest
that about 10% of net worth is good figure to tie up in all toys
combined. If all you have is a boat, fine, spend 10%. But if you've
got a motorhome, some expensve motorcycles, off road vehicles, etc the
total sunk into all of them combined should be about 10%. IMO.
A typical management-level family earning $200k probably has a net
worth of somewhere between $1mm- $5mm, depending on age, whether
anything has been inherited along the way, and whether there has been
any financial discipline in personal money management.

According to Uncle Chuck's Sage Financial Advice, two mid-managers
grossing $200k should *typically* be looking at a boat somewhere under
$500k.
:-)

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 09:00:54 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

According to Uncle Chuck's Sage Financial Advice, two mid-managers
grossing $200k should *typically* be looking at a boat somewhere under
$500k.

It's also important to understand whether or not the boat will qualify
for a "second home" deduction. That can improve net cash flow by
quite a lot in some cases.

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Feb 7, 8:48�pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 09:00:54 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
According to Uncle Chuck's Sage Financial Advice, two mid-managers
grossing $200k should *typically* be looking at a boat somewhere under
$500k.

It's also important to understand whether or not the boat will qualify
for a "second home" deduction. �That can improve net cash flow by
quite a lot in some cases.

Yes, and you simply recover the amount of income tax paid on the money
needed to make the interest portion of the payment. A family in the
30% tax bracket would probably save about $2000/month in taxes during
the early years of a $1mm boat note. Brings the net total down to
$8,000 per month before the boat ever leaves the dock, or about half
the total *gross* income for the family. My point remains, $200k per
year families are not buying $1mm boats......not unless great aunt
Harriet kicks the bucket and leaves them $500k to use for a DP.

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

By comparison, waterboarding is a short term shock technique which
does not leave lasting psychological or physical problems and is
effective 90% of the time - it's efficient and more humane because it,
at the most, lasts less than 5 minutes total. More to the point,
because it is a shock therapy, the information is much more accurate
and in general, does not have to be repeated more than once.

I've read only vague assertions of effectiveness without
corroboration. If it is so benign and effective why were
the video tapes destroyed? They would have been convincing.

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Feb 7, 5:51*pm, "John" wrote:


Couple of MAJOR point
The Washington times is about as conservative as they come - it will print
anything that paints democrats in a biased light but never even mentioned
how poorly the war in Iraq was going - or that there was even a different
opinion about it.

Kind of the opposite of the Washington Post, John.

$200,000 per year IS NOT rich - that is simply the Educated workers!!! *No
surprise that the educated are more critical of republican lies and
rhetoric. * See the first statement about WashTimes - any coincidence that
they would draw the income line at 200K to make a point?

Agreed. $200,000.00 isn't rich as of to say, but it's better than the
majority of earners.

The rich republican supporters that you hear about are the top 5% in income
who coincidently control about 40% of all the wealth in the country....-

Don't have fact's 'n figures in front of me, but those numbers do
sound debateable .

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Feb 8, 1:27�am, Tim wrote:

Don't have fact's 'n figures in front of me, but those numbers do
sound debateable .

Yes, those figures are wrong.

At least as of 2001, it was the top 1% (not 5%) that held almost 40%
of all private wealth in the US.

Some interesting tables and statistics at:

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesam...er/wealth.html

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 7, 8:48�pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 09:00:54 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
According to Uncle Chuck's Sage Financial Advice, two mid-managers
grossing $200k should *typically* be looking at a boat somewhere under
$500k.
It's also important to understand whether or not the boat will qualify
for a "second home" deduction. �That can improve net cash flow by
quite a lot in some cases.

Yes, and you simply recover the amount of income tax paid on the money
needed to make the interest portion of the payment. A family in the
30% tax bracket would probably save about $2000/month in taxes during
the early years of a $1mm boat note. Brings the net total down to
$8,000 per month before the boat ever leaves the dock, or about half
the total *gross* income for the family. My point remains, $200k per
year families are not buying $1mm boats......not unless great aunt
Harriet kicks the bucket and leaves them $500k to use for a DP.


A one million dollar boat loan?

A couple grossing $200,000 a year should look at a boat under $500,000?

Yeah, well under.

Hehehehe.

Fools and their money...

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Feb 7, 6:51*pm, "John" wrote:
"Lu Powell" wrote in message

...





The Democrats!

Entire article can read at
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/...D=/20071123/NA....

Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income
Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the
nation's wealthiest congressional districts.

In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth
concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael
Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage Foundation,
found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional
jurisdictions were represented by Democrats.

He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were
concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats.

"If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional districts,
we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of those
jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said.

A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer
taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing
jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said.

Couple of MAJOR point
The Washington times is about as conservative as they come - it will print
anything that paints democrats in a biased light but never even mentioned
how poorly the war in Iraq was going - or that there was even a different
opinion about it.

$200,000 per year IS NOT rich - that is simply the Educated workers!!! *No
surprise that the educated are more critical of republican lies and
rhetoric. * See the first statement about WashTimes - any coincidence that
they would draw the income line at 200K to make a point?

The rich republican supporters that you hear about are the top 5% in income
who coincidently control about 40% of all the wealth in the country....- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Can't have it both ways...

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Feb 7, 6:51*pm, "John" wrote:
"Lu Powell" wrote in message

...





The Democrats!

Entire article can read at
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/...D=/20071123/NA....

Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income
Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the
nation's wealthiest congressional districts.

In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth
concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael
Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage Foundation,
found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional
jurisdictions were represented by Democrats.

He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were
concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats.

"If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional districts,
we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of those
jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said.

A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer
taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing
jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said.

Couple of MAJOR point
The Washington times is about as conservative as they come - it will print
anything that paints democrats in a biased light but never even mentioned
how poorly the war in Iraq was going - or that there was even a different
opinion about it.

$200,000 per year IS NOT rich - that is simply the Educated workers!!! *No
surprise that the educated are more critical of republican lies and
rhetoric.

But don't seem to care about the constant lies and pandering of
Billary, are they dumb, or just selfish, fat, and they got theirs??

See the first statement about WashTimes - any coincidence that
they would draw the income line at 200K to make a point?

The rich republican supporters that you hear about are the top 5% in income
who coincidently control about 40% of all the wealth in the country

OK Harry, just make it up as you go along, we are used to democrats
here..

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 22:15:55 -0800, -rick- wrote:


waterboarding
I've read only vague assertions of effectiveness without corroboration.
If it is so benign and effective why were the video tapes destroyed?
They would have been convincing.

Perhaps a better question, if it's so benign, why is it so effective?

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 11:59:36 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


With respect to the efficacy, it works and very well. From what I've
read, that Kahlid guy broke after 1 minute 35 seconds which was
something of a record for resistance.

Do we have any corroboration for that? I mean, besides from the guys who
think it is such a great tool?


That's efficiency.

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Feb 8, 8:26*am, wrote:
On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 11:59:36 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
With respect to the efficacy, it works and very well. *From what I've
read, that Kahlid guy broke after 1 minute 35 seconds which was
something of a record for resistance.

Do we have any corroboration for that? *I mean, besides from the guys who
think it is such a great tool?



That's efficiency.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Why is something that someones big brother did to all of us as kids
making such a big problem. When they catch us they cut us to pieces
and then cut off our heads.. I just don't get the pussys crying about
a dunking similar to every public pool in the world, every day...
Especially since it seems to work so good, how do we know it works,
the democrats are screaming to stop it, that's how we know...

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 13:06:05 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 04:46:25 -0800 (PST),
wrote:


The rich republican supporters that you hear about are the top 5% in income
who coincidently control about 40% of all the wealth in the country....- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Can't have it both ways...

1 - 40% of the wealth is held by less than 1% of the population.
Compared to years past when 70% of the nations wealth was held by .5%
of the population, I'd say that was an improvement.

2 - ALL of the Presidential candidates live in homes that are worth
more than 1.5 million dollars.

3 - 80% of Senators live in homes valued more than 1 million dollars.

4 - 73% of all Representatives live in homes valued more than
$750,000.

Think about that.

Public servants my ass.

Tom, around here, $750 is not an expensive house at all. Last year my hovel
was close to that on Zillow. It's down now, but still...
--
John H

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 13:23:26 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 22:15:55 -0800, -rick- wrote:


waterboarding
I've read only vague assertions of effectiveness without corroboration.
If it is so benign and effective why were the video tapes destroyed?
They would have been convincing.

Perhaps a better question, if it's so benign, why is it so effective?

Scary.
--
John H

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 13:26:32 -0000, wrote:

On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 11:59:36 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


With respect to the efficacy, it works and very well. From what I've
read, that Kahlid guy broke after 1 minute 35 seconds which was
something of a record for resistance.

Do we have any corroboration for that? I mean, besides from the guys who
think it is such a great tool?


That's efficiency.

CIA guy interviewed yesterday on Fox.
--
John H

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
...
On Feb 7, 8:48?pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 09:00:54 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
According to Uncle Chuck's Sage Financial Advice, two mid-managers
grossing $200k should *typically* be looking at a boat somewhere under
$500k.

It's also important to understand whether or not the boat will qualify
for a "second home" deduction. ?That can improve net cash flow by
quite a lot in some cases.

Yes, and you simply recover the amount of income tax paid on the money
needed to make the interest portion of the payment. A family in the
30% tax bracket would probably save about $2000/month in taxes during
the early years of a $1mm boat note. Brings the net total down to
$8,000 per month before the boat ever leaves the dock, or about half
the total *gross* income for the family. My point remains, $200k per
year families are not buying $1mm boats......not unless great aunt
Harriet kicks the bucket and leaves them $500k to use for a DP.


Just doesn't make sense to me that high earners should get a tax break on a
luxury purchase such as a boat.
The US gov't should be putting that money toward your national debt.

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 04:46:25 -0800 (PST),
wrote:


The rich republican supporters that you hear about are the top 5% in
income
who coincidently control about 40% of all the wealth in the country....-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Can't have it both ways...

1 - 40% of the wealth is held by less than 1% of the population.
Compared to years past when 70% of the nations wealth was held by .5%
of the population, I'd say that was an improvement.

2 - ALL of the Presidential candidates live in homes that are worth
more than 1.5 million dollars.

3 - 80% of Senators live in homes valued more than 1 million dollars.

4 - 73% of all Representatives live in homes valued more than
$750,000.

Think about that.

Public servants my ass.

Why those self serving money grubbing assholes.

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

Don White wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
...
On Feb 7, 8:48?pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 09:00:54 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
According to Uncle Chuck's Sage Financial Advice, two mid-managers
grossing $200k should *typically* be looking at a boat somewhere under
$500k.
It's also important to understand whether or not the boat will qualify
for a "second home" deduction. ?That can improve net cash flow by
quite a lot in some cases.

Yes, and you simply recover the amount of income tax paid on the money
needed to make the interest portion of the payment. A family in the
30% tax bracket would probably save about $2000/month in taxes during
the early years of a $1mm boat note. Brings the net total down to
$8,000 per month before the boat ever leaves the dock, or about half
the total *gross* income for the family. My point remains, $200k per
year families are not buying $1mm boats......not unless great aunt
Harriet kicks the bucket and leaves them $500k to use for a DP.


Just doesn't make sense to me that high earners should get a tax break on a
luxury purchase such as a boat.
The US gov't should be putting that money toward your national debt.



Well, we have bit of tax code here that should be altered or
dumped...it says you can claim a boat as a second home if it has a
toilet and suchlike, and therefore you can deduct the interest you pay
if you borrow money to buy it.

If I were rewriting tax code, I would restrict the upper amount of
interest deductible on second home purchases and I would require that
boats or any other "second homes" financed under such "deductible"
conditions have a certificate stating at least 75% manufacture in the
United States. I see no need to provide the very wealthy with additional
ways to avoid paying taxes.

OT - The party of the rich is...
 

HK wrote:
Don White wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
...
On Feb 7, 8:48?pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 09:00:54 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
According to Uncle Chuck's Sage Financial Advice, two mid-managers
grossing $200k should *typically* be looking at a boat somewhere under
$500k.
It's also important to understand whether or not the boat will qualify
for a "second home" deduction. ?That can improve net cash flow by
quite a lot in some cases.

Yes, and you simply recover the amount of income tax paid on the money
needed to make the interest portion of the payment. A family in the
30% tax bracket would probably save about $2000/month in taxes during
the early years of a $1mm boat note. Brings the net total down to
$8,000 per month before the boat ever leaves the dock, or about half
the total *gross* income for the family. My point remains, $200k per
year families are not buying $1mm boats......not unless great aunt
Harriet kicks the bucket and leaves them $500k to use for a DP.


Just doesn't make sense to me that high earners should get a tax break
on a luxury purchase such as a boat.
The US gov't should be putting that money toward your national debt.


Well, we have bit of tax code here that should be altered or dumped...it
says you can claim a boat as a second home if it has a toilet and
suchlike, and therefore you can deduct the interest you pay if you
borrow money to buy it.

If I were rewriting tax code, I would restrict the upper amount of
interest deductible on second home purchases and I would require that
boats or any other "second homes" financed under such "deductible"
conditions have a certificate stating at least 75% manufacture in the
United States. I see no need to provide the very wealthy with additional
ways to avoid paying taxes.


Harry,
Do you find it very frustrating to have all of these ideas you want to
implement, and no one will take you serious?