Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...
Mr Anderson

Washington, UT

#5164 Dec 15, 2012
Mike DiRucci wrote:
<quoted text>
Aw Andy. I read your posts I really try. But they are so illegible and dopey!
You gotta get over Obama winning the election! Accept it and move on. It's time to stop whining and get "Yes We Can"ing!
When can we expect the first wave of all that "yes we can"? I mean it's been 4 years already and things are getting worse and worse, no "yes we can" in sight!, Do you think it will be soon?
What do you think the first exciting results will be? More jobs? When? Oh this is all so very exciting, I'm getting a tingle all up my leg!
Yes We Can! But we didn't. Not the last 4 years. Maybe this term. Or not. Probably not. Oh well. Bush's fault! If it weren't for him we'd be having yes we can all over the place like crazy! Damn Bush!
ive never read more sniveling drivel from anyone here??

you seem to say the exact same thing every time, as wwell..

have great holiday mental mikey!
TheWayItWillBe

Covina, CA

#5165 Dec 15, 2012
Yo Yo go slow, and then stop.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#5166 Dec 15, 2012
Mr Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
ive never read more sniveling drivel from anyone here??
Is that a yes or no question? What are trying to ask ?
Mr Anderson

Washington, UT

#5167 Dec 15, 2012
RiccardoFire wrote:
Making the Rich Poorer Doesnít Enrich the Middle Class
Would you rather have more money, or keep your current income and see the rich become less wealthy?
Itís not a trick question. Any member of the middle class would rather have more money. Income inequality may be a problem for society at large, but it isnít a concern for those struggling to make ends meet. Give more to those with less, and they will be better off. Making the rich poorer does nothing for the middle class -- it may even hurt -- except assuage some jealousy for the next guyís material success.
actually, if the tax rates on the wealthy go back to clinton era rates?? like they will in a fort night?

april 14' returns will yeild more money than 13'

and if Obama spends some of it on infrastructure programs??

it WILL actually redistribute money to the middle class..

this is what SOCIALISM is...

they are supposed to pay down the deficit first though??

but I doubt they will.... since neither party ever does.

you DO realize that every politcian in washington(without a "R' before their name) is working to get those "R"'s to sign on to the middle class tax cut, already passed by the senate?

no you dont follow washington do you?

"income eqaulity is a problem at larger, but those struggling to make ends meet dont care about it"

REALLY??

I think they do....

why else would 69% of amercians favor a tax increase on the wealthiest 2 percent??

your perception doesnt even come close to matching up with reality.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#5168 Dec 15, 2012
Mr Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
actually, if the tax rates on the wealthy go back to clinton era rates??
Does that mean we will go back to the Clinton era spending rates?

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#5169 Dec 15, 2012
Mr Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>

and if Obama spends some of it on infrastructure programs??
it WILL actually redistribute money to the middle class..
He tried that before, it failed. Stop your sissy fit against the classes, it has been tried before and doesn't work. You can't have it both ways, tax more and spend more. Read what Deansays.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#5171 Dec 15, 2012
Mr Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
no you dont follow washington do you?
Actually I do, I really like RG3, I know he's a little banged up right now. Who do you follow?

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#5172 Dec 15, 2012
Mr Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
"income eqaulity is a problem at larger, but those struggling to make ends meet dont care about it"
REALLY??
Yes really, you need to get your GED. Learn to write a sentence and compose a question. Did you know a statement doesn't have a ? at the end?

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#5173 Dec 15, 2012
Mr Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
why else would 69% of amercians favor a tax increase on the wealthiest 2 percent??
your perception doesnt even come close to matching up with reality.
Anytime you give a figure, I'm sure you have a link to show us where that came from. Therefore, what is the link? Or did you just make that up again? or misread it.
TheWayItWillBe

Covina, CA

#5174 Dec 15, 2012
John BoneHead gives in, he didn't have a choice in the matter.

Since the Republican and Tea Party fools are about to set themselves on fire with the American Public, who didn't vote for their idiots Willard Mitt Romney and Paul D. Ryan.

This of course will be the start of reducing a 10,000 pages of Tax Laws.

Mike DiRucci

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#5175 Dec 15, 2012
Mr Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
ive never read more sniveling drivel from anyone here??
you seem to say the exact same thing every time, as wwell..
have great holiday mental mikey!
See how you are psycho Andy? You beg me to respond to your dopey posts, I try to and this is the reward I get. Sniveling drivel indeed! What a dope!

No wonder you never get laid.

Mike DiRucci

“Formerly Frankie Rizzo”

Since: Sep 12

Canarsie, NY

#5176 Dec 15, 2012
Mr Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>
bla bla bla...sniveling drivel...bla bla bla...more sniveling drivel...bla bla ...long winded nonsnsne...bla bla bla...why else would 69% of amercians favor a tax increase on the wealthiest 2 percent??
Easy. The tyranny of the majority. 99% of the people vote to raise the other 1%'s taxes. Nice!

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for dinner.

Since: Nov 12

Elk Grove, CA

#5177 Dec 15, 2012
Mr Anderson wrote:
<quoted text>

no you dont follow washington do you?
Hey andy, did you hear Cousins is starting for Washington on Sunday since RG3 is hurt. Go Skins!
TheWayItWillBe

Covina, CA

#5178 Dec 15, 2012
Signed sealed and delivered so read it next time Porta Potty.

Vaulted ceilings would be nice.
TheWayItWillBe

Covina, CA

#5179 Dec 15, 2012
John BoneHead gives in, he didn't have a choice in the matter anyway, he was acting like a spoiled brat anyway.

Since the Republican and Tea Party fools are about to set themselves on fire with the American Public, who didn't vote for their idiots Willard Mitt Romney and Paul D. Ryan.

This of course will be the start of reducing a 10,000 pages of Tax Laws.
Mr Anderson

Washington, UT

#5180 Dec 15, 2012
Mike DiRucci wrote:
<quoted text>
Easy. The tyranny of the majority. 99% of the people vote to raise the other 1%'s taxes. Nice!
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for dinner.
BY "the lamb", im sure you mean those who capitalize off our markets...the wealthy.!

or is it the other way around??

FUN!!
Mr Anderson

Washington, UT

#5181 Dec 15, 2012
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Hey andy, did you hear Cousins is starting for Washington on Sunday since RG3 is hurt. Go Skins!
skins?? as in golf?/

HAHA!!

see you at the super bowl!! NOT!
Mr Anderson

Washington, UT

#5182 Dec 15, 2012
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>He tried that before, it failed. Stop your sissy fit against the classes, it has been tried before and doesn't work. You can't have it both ways, tax more and spend more. Read what Deansays.
we tried that before....

it is not the panacea ....there really is none in capitalism.

social controls are the only small fix to keep a few more bucks in the hand of the middle class....

after all??? they just spend it and it goes back to the wealthy??

who can argue basic math??

you do!!
Mr Anderson

Washington, UT

#5183 Dec 15, 2012
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Does that mean we will go back to the Clinton era spending rates?
when it comes to defence spending??

id love to go back...

Bush doubled the defence budget....bad bush.....bad Obama for not cutting it already...

it is the first thing that should be on the table when it comes to a discussion of "cuts"

we obviously need them as well as new revenues...

given the chance.... would YOU go back to clinton era levels of defence spending??
Mr Anderson

Washington, UT

#5184 Dec 15, 2012
Mike DiRucci wrote:
It's an outstanding essay I wish Andy could read and comprehend it as it contains a short course in economics. Real world economics. Not fake yes we can hope for results from a losing strategy andy/Obama economics.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimpowell/2012/10...
wow more rhetoric about spoiled billionaires having to give up a yacht or two.....

a 3% hike in rates, isnt really going to kill them, or any jobs...

they have offshored 32 trillion dollars after all..

let me ask you this old fart??

did the wealthy do that bad in the 90's??

no answer...

silence!!

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.

Beverly Hills Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
I HATE little dogs! 7 hr doggito 8
Good Riddance Chris Paul 12 hr lakers thru and thru 1
Johnny Depp 15 hr Rip Chen Picket 6
Toilet charity gets Indian village to take on T... Mon Jan 1
Who are these that protest the protesters? Jun 26 actorvet 1
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) Jun 26 True That 20,946
ByteFence- steer clear of these a-holes Jun 25 Rodrigo 1

Beverly Hills Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Beverly Hills Mortgages