Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...
Snore

Charlotte, NC

#29788 Dec 5, 2012
waco1909 wrote:
Emlu backs her opinions up with links Mike you ignorant slut.(I doubt you remember that"line"from Saturday Night Live).
I thought it was just me and my stupidity. Mike wants Emlu to back up her posts with a link, but yet he thinks it's too tedious at times for MIKE to post a link with his opinion. It's gone way beyond the scope of pointing his double standard BS anymore.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#29789 Dec 5, 2012
Snore wrote:
<quoted text>I thought it was just me and my stupidity. Mike wants Emlu to back up her posts with a link, but yet he thinks it's too tedious at times for MIKE to post a link with his opinion. It's gone way beyond the scope of pointing his double standard BS anymore.
Gave you the "agree" and would have "doubled" it, if I could have.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#29790 Dec 5, 2012
TSF wrote:
I favor a flat tax on all income with no loopholes, no subsidies, no incentives,no sweetheart deals , no kickbacks or bid rigging, no exemptions, no exclusions.
<quoted text>
Thank you, I believe that's called "true" flat tax. You make more you pay more, you make less you pay less. The % would be the same.
TSF

Fayetteville, NC

#29791 Dec 5, 2012
Possibly typical but not all inclusive. Also , I do not believe that religion and science are in conflict in any way. For instance, I see overwhelming evidence of evolution and do not believe that the theory conflicts with scriptures. If God is all powerful, he can use any process he choses to develop species.
The most misguided human individuals in my estimation, are the ones who claim to know the mind of God and to be in possession of the "only true religion". These folks do more damage to their beliefs than they can ever know. On the opposite end of that extreme are those who deny the possibility of existence of God, or anything else for that matter, just because they have not yet seen proof. The first lesson a scientist has to learn is to keep an open mind and to the extent humanly possible, to exclude personal bias in evaluating evidence/results/data/calculat ions/observations.
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>This quote typifies the lack of science of the religious.
Snore

Charlotte, NC

#29792 Dec 5, 2012
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
I hopped over here and just about missed your post because your picture is gone?? First, we're not talking about every other country on the planet, we're discussing the U.S. Secondly, if I must be honest, I don't always reply to Taxpayer because I don't understand his posts. Doesn't mean he's wrong, just means I don't understand and he got a little testy with me one time about gun safety and I decided to leave him alone. As for his party affiliation, I haven't figured that out either, so your guess is as good as mine. Mike, this is how I feel and if you feel the need, you can name it a new "ism". Ownership of property is not just my yard, car or home, it's the money I worked for that I own. It's mine, therefore IMO, it's my property. When I'm told by the government that a group of people make too much money, or have acquired too much money (however you want to word it) and they need to tax them a "little more" to help our country through no fault of the citizens that didn't make the tax laws to begin with, spent our money like drunken sailors and now owe other countries and are having to print money, why does anyone need to "pay a little more"? If the new "paying a little more" doesn't work; what's next, pay a little more, pay a little more etc. Let's be real here, there's the haves, the kind of haves and the have nots. I think all classes should pay a flat tax and be done with it. Back to the communism thing, when people work hard and manage to make a decent life for themselves, only in the U.S. are you punished for it through taxation. This is so all the perks and programs of the politicians and people that own them get pushed through. If these politicians and their buddies that bought them like these programs, tax the heck out of them and leave my money alone. While we're at it, when a government can force you to buy a commodity of ANY KIND i.e. healthcare or punish you again through penalities or taxation, what's next? When did our government get bold enough to tell us how to spend our money that we made and paid taxes on? That's not called freedom, it's called taking from one class and giving to another, so everybody will be equal. Well quess what, everybody's not equal financially and that's not my problem. Where will government intervention stop in our lives?
Guess what Bacon? Your pic was MIA too, but only for a minute or two. I thought my pc was having a technical breakdown, but Mike's pic is MIA as well. I think "we"--oops "I'm" in for a big surprise. Mike's changing his pic, imo. Look out "folks", damn it, look out me.
TSF

Fayetteville, NC

#29793 Dec 5, 2012
I am not sure about the amount of scientific knowledge St Thomas Aquinas had, but his statement reveals that he clearly understood why there is a difference between believers and non believers. The church opposition to science has been brutal in the past to protect dogma, which is much different than religion. Much later, Copernicus was deemed a heretic and a fool because he had the audacity to claim that the Earth was not the center of the Universe and that the Earth was revolving around the Sun. Galileo was convicted as a heretic as a result of confirming the ideas of Corponicus and was only post humanously pardoned by the Catholic Church in 1996. Church adherance to dogma has created the carnage, conflict, injustice, horrors,ignorance , etc. That dogma is not religion.

Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Of course in the dark ages, no one had scientific explanations for most natural events, so I can see why Tom thought this.
Any statement pre-Darwin, must be looked at in this perspective.
And even after that, one should look at the known science of the day for full perspective.
BTW, all founding fathers were pre-Darwin.
Snore

Charlotte, NC

#29794 Dec 5, 2012
TSF wrote:
I am not sure about the amount of scientific knowledge St Thomas Aquinas had, but his statement reveals that he clearly understood why there is a difference between believers and non believers. The church opposition to science has been brutal in the past to protect dogma, which is much different than religion. Much later, Copernicus was deemed a heretic and a fool because he had the audacity to claim that the Earth was not the center of the Universe and that the Earth was revolving around the Sun. Galileo was convicted as a heretic as a result of confirming the ideas of Corponicus and was only post humanously pardoned by the Catholic Church in 1996. Church adherance to dogma has created the carnage, conflict, injustice, horrors,ignorance , etc. That dogma is not religion.
<quoted text>
Imo, it's pointless to "debate" with Mike on any front, ESPECIALLY religion. You're wasting your valuable energy on that subject matter. I wonder what the "course" of conversation is during CHRISTMAS feasts are like? I believe Mike is simply addicted to his prejudices period.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#29795 Dec 5, 2012
Someone sent me this today in reference to Christmas feasts, I like it....

"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather
to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand and wine in the other,
body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what
a ride!"

“Vote”

Since: May 12

Houston

#29796 Dec 5, 2012
TSF wrote:
I am not sure about the amount of scientific knowledge St Thomas Aquinas had, but his statement reveals that he clearly understood why there is a difference between believers and non believers. The church opposition to science has been brutal in the past to protect dogma, which is much different than religion. Much later, Copernicus was deemed a heretic and a fool because he had the audacity to claim that the Earth was not the center of the Universe and that the Earth was revolving around the Sun. Galileo was convicted as a heretic as a result of confirming the ideas of Corponicus and was only post humanously pardoned by the Catholic Church in 1996. Church adherance to dogma has created the carnage, conflict, injustice, horrors,ignorance , etc. That dogma is not religion.
<quoted text>
That is a great post, purely.

“Vote”

Since: May 12

Houston

#29797 Dec 5, 2012
emlu wrote:
Someone sent me this today in reference to Christmas feasts, I like it....
"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather
to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand and wine in the other,
body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what
a ride!"
Nice!

“Vote”

Since: May 12

Houston

#29798 Dec 5, 2012
Snore wrote:
<quoted text>Imo, it's pointless to "debate" with Mike on any front, ESPECIALLY religion. You're wasting your valuable energy on that subject matter. I wonder what the "course" of conversation is during CHRISTMAS feasts are like? I believe Mike is simply addicted to his prejudices period.
Profound observation.
Taxpayer

Oxford, NC

#29799 Dec 6, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Again, look up the word 'communism'. Yes, we have some socialism, thus some of our system has some things in common with communism, but it ends there. And the socialism in communism is far more broad than what we have here.
Just try to have an honest debate. It might make your concerns look legitimate.

com•mu•nism (kmy-nzm)
1. A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
2. Communism
a. A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
b. The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.
With central government control of business, with the takeover and management of companies by the government. What part of this definition do you not understand?
Taxpayer

Oxford, NC

#29800 Dec 6, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Again, have an honest debate, or all your concerns look suspect. You ignored his point and went for the personal attack. Evidently you have no rebuttal.
So TSF is too much of a coward to stand up for it’s self? There is not one thing honest with your debate if that is what you call the junk you put out.
Taxpayer

Oxford, NC

#29801 Dec 6, 2012
TSF wrote:
I favor a flat tax on all income with no loopholes, no subsidies, no incentives,no sweetheart deals , no kickbacks or bid rigging, no exemptions, no exclusions.
<quoted text>
Really! That's good but what happen to the get the rich scam?
TSF

Fayetteville, NC

#29802 Dec 6, 2012
I have never advocated soaking the rich. All I want is for them to pay the same tax RATE that everyone else pays. We just can no longer afford welfare/socialism for the rich. I know republikans want to cut social security (which is still self sustaining) so that they can give tax breaks to the rich. That reverse socialism just isn't going to continue because the public is starting to pay attention to what happens their money.
Taxpayer wrote:
<quoted text>
Really! That's good but what happen to the get the rich scam?
TSF

Fayetteville, NC

#29803 Dec 6, 2012
Republikans can't lead, cant follow and can't get out of the way. Republikans are so accustomed to obstructing that they are now refusing to raise taxes on the rich to avoid raising taxes even more on the rich --and everyone else. Does anyone see a disconnect in that logic?
This is kind of a parallel the the pre election decision by republikans to present a presidential candidate who would force their prejudicial evangelical Christians to chose between voting for a Christian or the white guy.
But then , no one has actually accused republicans of being logical.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#29804 Dec 6, 2012
TSF wrote:
I have never advocated soaking the rich. All I want is for them to pay the same tax RATE that everyone else pays. We just can no longer afford welfare/socialism for the rich. I know republikans want to cut social security (which is still self sustaining) so that they can give tax breaks to the rich. That reverse socialism just isn't going to continue because the public is starting to pay attention to what happens their money.
<quoted text>
So, is it that you think the public has not been paying attention to what has been happening to their money? Please explain "welfare/socialism for the rich".

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#29805 Dec 6, 2012
TSF wrote:
Republikans can't lead, cant follow and can't get out of the way. Republikans are so accustomed to obstructing that they are now refusing to raise taxes on the rich to avoid raising taxes even more on the rich --and everyone else. Does anyone see a disconnect in that logic?
This is kind of a parallel the the pre election decision by republikans to present a presidential candidate who would force their prejudicial evangelical Christians to chose between voting for a Christian or the white guy.
But then , no one has actually accused republicans of being logical.
Are you opposed to first cutting wasteful programs, shrimp on treadmills, so to speak, and then raising taxes. I, think there are "wasteful" programs out there that have been funded for so long that they may be outdated.
TSF

Fayetteville, NC

#29806 Dec 6, 2012
Yes. I ,TSF , am very afraid--- that republikans will perpetuate ignorance and limit our future by destroying public education,---that republikans will destroy religious freedom in the USA by codifying their religion into law,--that republikans will continue to crush working people with taxes that the rich escape,-- that republikans will continue allow foreign corporate owners to buy our elections,-- that republikans will continue giving away our natural resources (oil, coal, timber, gas etc),---that the republikan party's corruption will so weaken the party that they become unable to balance and oppose some of the democrat party's left wind nut ideas.
Taxpayer wrote:
<quoted text>
So TSF is too much of a coward to stand up for it’s self? There is not one thing honest with your debate if that is what you call the junk you put out.

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#29807 Dec 6, 2012
emlu wrote:
<quoted text>Are you opposed to first cutting wasteful programs, shrimp on treadmills, so to speak, and then raising taxes. I, think there are "wasteful" programs out there that have been funded for so long that they may be outdated.
Sorry about replying to my own post, but this link is outdated, it's from 2005, but it shows some funded programs that are just stupid. Maybe Washington should start here and the look at raising taxes.

http://funding-programs.idilogic.aidpage.com/

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Charlotte Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Cam's pimped out again 19 hr Boogie Man 4
The ex gov visits Trump 19 hr Boogie Man 1
Trump Hates Poor White Folks Wed Trump calls you t... 1
guitar center sucks Wed Mark mark 10
News Charlotte strip club loses ABC license for hist... Tue Fred Herbert 5
Get ready Charlotte Tue Native 17
Pat..GTFO NOW! Dec 5 Wellread 2

Charlotte Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Charlotte Mortgages