Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Georgia in 2010?

[Zoltar]

Informed Opinion wrote:

<quoted text>
That logic would mean that when the law allowed slavery, we shouldn't criticize those who elected to enjoy the financial benefits if owning their fellow human beings.
After all it was legal to keep others in chains, take their labor, occasionally rape their wives and daughters, and maybe kill off the troublemakers.
Legal isn't the same as moral.
There was a time when it was even more legal for corporations to collude and conspire to create monopolies, prevent competition, force Americans to live at the complete mercy of the "Trusts", and drive anyone not part of the "club" into financial ruin.
Hey it was legal, so what if millions lives in abject poverty so that Standard Oil and its monopolistic cohorts could make billions.
Legal isn't the same as fair.
There was a time when 50,000 Americans were sent to die in a faraway war, which the government already knew was unwinable, while those who make billions for the war enjoyed their profits and the sons of the wealthy and powerful stayed safely far from danger.
Legal isn't the same as right.
Hey, I'm no moral leader, I take advantage of the corrupt system whenever I can, as does almost everyone else. But, that doesn't mean we should not criticize it's faults.
Real Americans seek to improve their country by criticizing it's policies when they are wrong.
That's not complaining, that's caring.

Great post.....especially the last two sentences, which transcend our differing political ideologies.

[Informed Opinion]

BS IS Called wrote:

Legal, isn't the same as moral, except with regards to Obamacare.

Agreed.

Sometimes we get it right - we pass a law that is moral and right.

Thank God those parasites and deadbeats who refused to pay for their medical insurance,
and instead made us responsible grown ups pay for their medical and hospital care, may have to pay their own way and carry their own water from now on.

Isn't it nice when we don't have to subsidize lazy deadbeats who won't buy insurance and instead spend their money on beer, cigarettes, fatty foods, and used porn videos.

Just wish we didn't have to bribe the politicians and pharmaceutical companies to get it passed.

Ah well, never let the perfect be the enemy of the possible.

[Informed Opinion]

Informed Opinion wrote:

<quoted text>Agreed.

Sometimes we get it right - we pass a law that is moral and right.

Thank God those parasites and deadbeats who refused to pay for their medical insurance,
and instead made us responsible grown ups pay for their medical and hospital care, may have to pay their own way and carry their own water from now on.

Isn't it nice when we don't have to subsidize lazy deadbeats who won't buy insurance and instead spend their money on beer, cigarettes, fatty foods, and used porn videos.

Just wish we didn't have to bribe the politicians and pharmaceutical companies to get it passed.

Ah well, never let the perfect be the enemy of the possible.

I forgot to ask.

What is it with the Cowboys ?

When will we return to the times of great class like: Landry, Staubach, Hayes, Bates, and Walt Garrison.

Gotta love Staubach's work ethic:

"Confidence doesn't come out of nowhere. It's a result of something... hours and days and weeks and years of constant work and dedication."

Roger Staubach

[Informed Opinion]

Zoltar wrote:

<quoted text>Great post.....especially the last two sentences, which transcend our differing political ideologies.

Thanks, but I'm still jealous of your undisputed status as the the "All Time Best Humorous Posts" awards you have earned on TOPIX. My buddies at breakfast and I still laugh over the planet where your sister/mother/ whatever, resides.

The only recent competition was a post in Deadspin's comments section that read;

"The Alabama offensive line is embarrassed to confess that despite it's previous statements, Notre Dames line backer Manti Te'o was imaginary.

[informed opinion]

and after I meet with my rich clients on the beach for lunch I will figure out why the Falcons bite the big one.

[informed opinion]

Informed Opinion wrote:

<quoted text>
Agreed.
Sometimes we get it right - we pass a law that is moral and right.
Thank God those parasites and deadbeats who refused to pay for their medical insurance,
and instead made us responsible grown ups pay for their medical and hospital care, may have to pay their own way and carry their own water from now on.
Isn't it nice when we don't have to subsidize lazy deadbeats who won't buy insurance and instead spend their money on beer, cigarettes, fatty foods, and used porn videos.
Just wish we didn't have to bribe the politicians and pharmaceutical companies to get it passed.
Ah well, never let the perfect be the enemy of the possible.

Did I tell you Angel Adams of Tampa is my hero? She's making being a welfare queen a desired position!

[BS IS Called]

Informed Opinion wrote:

<quoted text>
Agreed.
Sometimes we get it right - we pass a law that is moral and right.
Thank God those parasites and deadbeats who refused to pay for their medical insurance,
and instead made us responsible grown ups pay for their medical and hospital care, may have to pay their own way and carry their own water from now on.
Isn't it nice when we don't have to subsidize lazy deadbeats who won't buy insurance and instead spend their money on beer, cigarettes, fatty foods, and used porn videos.
Just wish we didn't have to bribe the politicians and pharmaceutical companies to get it passed.
Ah well, never let the perfect be the enemy of the possible.

The enemy of "good" is "better".

[Synergy]

Informed Opinion wrote:

<quoted text>
That logic would mean that when the law allowed slavery, we shouldn't criticize those who elected to enjoy the financial benefits if owning their fellow human beings.
After all it was legal to keep others in chains, take their labor, occasionally rape their wives and daughters, and maybe kill off the troublemakers.
Legal isn't the same as moral.
There was a time when it was even more legal for corporations to collude and conspire to create monopolies, prevent competition, force Americans to live at the complete mercy of the "Trusts", and drive anyone not part of the "club" into financial ruin.
Hey it was legal, so what if millions lives in abject poverty so that Standard Oil and its monopolistic cohorts could make billions.
Legal isn't the same as fair.
There was a time when 50,000 Americans were sent to die in a faraway war, which the government already knew was unwinable, while those who make billions for the war enjoyed their profits and the sons of the wealthy and powerful stayed safely far from danger.
Legal isn't the same as right.
Hey, I'm no moral leader, I take advantage of the corrupt system whenever I can, as does almost everyone else. But, that doesn't mean we should not criticize it's faults.
Real Americans seek to improve their country by criticizing it's policies when they are wrong.
That's not complaining, that's caring.

Does it make sense to you that YOU are taking advantage of a system that you don't agree with? That's just DO as I SAY and NOT as I DO rhetoric. Your critizing and then taking advantage is disingenuous at best. If you are going to talk the talk, walk the walk. Lead by example. Personally, I don't know of ANYONE who doesn't CARE. I'm just not accustomed to anyone who complains as you do, points fingers and then does the same thing that you are critizing others for. LIberals would call conservatives HYPOCRITES for saying such.
So, I'll tell you now....I CARE. Do you? Do you CARE enough to stop taking advantage of a system you don't agree with? Show how much YOU care. Walk the walk. You are NOT helping by taking advantage when ALL the others can't. Prove how much YOU care.

[not so smart after all]

Bill in Dville wrote:

<quoted text>
BS on your BS.
"I pay gains tax when I sell stock and real estate."
You wouldn't under the FairTax.
"I am far from the upper percentage, adding in my wages earned I pay a lot more than Romney as a percentage of income!!"
You also apparently have a different type of income than Romney, that is taxed different than Romney. What's so difficult to understand about that? DIFFERENT TYPES OF INCOME ARE TAXED DIFFERENTLY! IT'S THE LAW! IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!
"You still won't answer the question "WHAT DO YOU HAVE AGAINST THE UPPER PERCENTAGE OF WAGE EARNERS PAYING THE SAME AS MIDDLE CLASS AMERICANS"
I will answer your questions when you answer mine.... Learning the answers to my questions would educate somewhat, unless you don't want to learn...
But to answer your question: we ALL pay the same tax rates. We all use the same forms and tax tables. Some of us have different types of income.

HOW MANY times have I said the problem is NOT with the tax rates??? It’s with the super friendly way the rich and corporations pay off legislators to reduce the effective tax rate that they pay. The middle class doesn’t elect our legislators anymore, the Supreme Court has made it possible for get a monkey elected in this country with enough money. Those with enough money now have the green light to use it to buy elections allowing them to continue the accumulation of wealth and further depress the American Middle Class. Remember them, the American Middle Class used to be the fuel for the economic engine that is the United States. Now the fuel for the upper percentage of wage earners and large corporations is OFFSHORE.
Do you really believe that American grown corporations with the help of American people and the American government have enjoyed huge prosperity NOW owe this country NOTHING. That is all about the profits and damn any damage to the county that spawned them in the quest for profits???
AGAIN, what do you have against the MIDDLE CLASS????

You need to roll over in bed and WAKE UP!

[Columbus Native]

Agreed wrote:

Anyone who thinks "trickle down economy" works is in the top 1%. This does not work, has been proven not to work, and still some people think this is the way to go. Even the word "trickle" should have given everyone a clue to the non-existence of this theory. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Nothing "trickles down" when the greedy can put it in their pocket. And that's exactly where it's been going. When you see people that have worked at the same place for years and still make little more than minimum wage, it's terrible. Especially when that company is making millions of dollars. The big money stays at the top and nothing "trickles" down except their pockets when the change from those $100's get too heavy.

Trickle down economics was a propaganda brainwash idea by Ronald Reagan and his economic advisor David Stockman. It sold and the rest is history. These two were intent on allowing the very wealthy to become even wealthier. Sure it does'nt work but after it was sold then it's too late. Rich people set up corporation that give millions of jobs to Mexico and China, they don't spend their money setting up plants in America. The minimum wage in Mexico is $1.57 an hour compared to 7.25 an hour here. There is no minimum nor maximum wage to the top CEO's in major corporations. There seems to be no balance in company wages anymore if there ever was one.

[Synergy]

Just thinking....a lot of good points have been made in the last several posts. Does anyone have any serious ideas in regard to how this can be remedied?
The main problem seems to be politicians who lie to us in order to get elected. That includes the presidents(past and present) and the rest of congress. Lobbiest have and apparently will continue to be a major problem. ALL presidents(And YES, Obama has, too.) have given into them. How can we determine which people will be able to resist the lure of the lobbiests?

[Obit]

Informed Opinion wrote:

<quoted text>
Thanks, but I'm still jealous of your undisputed status as the the "All Time Best Humorous Posts" awards you have earned on TOPIX. My buddies at breakfast and I still laugh over the planet where your sister/mother/ whatever, resides.
The only recent competition was a post in Deadspin's comments section that read;
"The Alabama offensive line is embarrassed to confess that despite it's previous statements, Notre Dames line backer Manti Te'o was imaginary.

Notre "Dames" number one ranking in the polls (before 'Bama showed them how the SEC plays the game) was also another illusion.

[Obit]

Here's something only the rich enjoy:

http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/...

[vote against them]

Synergy wrote:

Just thinking....a lot of good points have been made in the last several posts. Does anyone have any serious ideas in regard to how this can be remedied?
The main problem seems to be politicians who lie to us in order to get elected. That includes the presidents(past and present) and the rest of congress. Lobbiest have and apparently will continue to be a major problem. ALL presidents(And YES, Obama has, too.) have given into them. How can we determine which people will be able to resist the lure of the lobbiests?

The ONLY way we will ever have a chance is to limit the amount of money spent on political campaigns. A law must also make pacs and super pacs illegal and require ALL political ads to disclose where the money comes from in any ad they run. The rich have all but shut out sensible choices in elections. All the money spent on ads full of lies and innuendo against the competition is now deciding who wins. Call and write your congressman and demand a change in campaign finances, or we are DONE.
We don’t need guns on any kind to take back government. We just need to let politicians know that if true election reform is not done no matter what their stance is on taxes and gun control you will vote AGAINST them

[Mayor of Dogpatch]

But how else am I gonna get elected as Mayor of Dogpatch if I can't have super PAC money?

[jeb stuart]

Informed Opinion wrote:

<quoted text>
That logic would mean that when the law allowed slavery, we shouldn't criticize those who elected to enjoy the financial benefits if owning their fellow human beings.
After all it was legal to keep others in chains, take their labor, occasionally rape their wives and daughters, and maybe kill off the troublemakers.
Legal isn't the same as moral.
There was a time when it was even more legal for corporations to collude and conspire to create monopolies, prevent competition, force Americans to live at the complete mercy of the "Trusts", and drive anyone not part of the "club" into financial ruin.
Hey it was legal, so what if millions lives in abject poverty so that Standard Oil and its monopolistic cohorts could make billions.
Legal isn't the same as fair.
There was a time when 50,000 Americans were sent to die in a faraway war, which the government already knew was unwinable, while those who make billions for the war enjoyed their profits and the sons of the wealthy and powerful stayed safely far from danger.
Legal isn't the same as right.
Hey, I'm no moral leader, I take advantage of the corrupt system whenever I can, as does almost everyone else. But, that doesn't mean we should not criticize it's faults.
Real Americans seek to improve their country by criticizing it's policies when they are wrong.
That's not complaining, that's caring.

speaking of the vietnam war,i wonder whatever happened to the genius that thought up the 'domino theory'?

[Agreed]

chevy wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh yeah?
Well, my dad can beat up your dad.
My dog's better than your dog.
I just have one question re your incredibly dumb post: What exactly is "management dummy"? Are you by any chance in the mannequin business?
Giddyup?
Little red wagon?
You funny man

Yeah, you're a "my dog" kinda guy! I wouldn't expect anymore out of you after reading your flaky opinions. You are seriously asking what management is?? Management is the collective body of those who manage or direct an enterprise. A dummy is YOU. Now, do you need more schoolin' boy or do you get it now??

[jeb stuart]

jeb stuart wrote:

<quoted text>speaking of the vietnam war,i wonder whatever happened to the genius that thought up the 'domino theory'?

someone posted me on facebook to inform me that he was teaching humanities at yale.do you really think that this is true?

[Synergy]

vote against them wrote:

<quoted text>
The ONLY way we will ever have a chance is to limit the amount of money spent on political campaigns. A law must also make pacs and super pacs illegal and require ALL political ads to disclose where the money comes from in any ad they run. The rich have all but shut out sensible choices in elections. All the money spent on ads full of lies and innuendo against the competition is now deciding who wins. Call and write your congressman and demand a change in campaign finances, or we are DONE.
We don’t need guns on any kind to take back government. We just need to let politicians know that if true election reform is not done no matter what their stance is on taxes and gun control you will vote AGAINST them

Great response. The only way this can get accomplished(it seems to me) is that we, as a people, would have to be organized and all on board. Otherwise, we'll just end up as we are now. How do you think that can be accomplished?

[formerresident]

And it rang, and it rang, and it rang.