tpxer

Johnson City, TN

#62672 Jan 17, 2013
Nuh wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't listen to Rush bloviate any more, but if he was dead...I assume his family would miss him; as would his employees, the companies that advertise on his show; as well as the 20 million who listen to his show.
WHAT family? Who would admit it?

I thought real people LEARN. So he has probably lost some advertising with each new idiocy. And those 20 million are not really listening. Most can hear but they are not listening.
Nuh

South Pittsburg, TN

#62673 Jan 17, 2013
If a man says he'll fix it, he WILL. There is no need to go and remind him every dang six months about it
Overtaxed

Thorn Hill, TN

#62674 Jan 17, 2013
Nuh wrote:
Conservatives support the 2nd Amendment because it is an unalienable right bestowed by our Creator written down by our Founders.
The majority liberals do not support the 2nd Amendment, and many of those who say they do...do so for one reason.
Sassy - It is spelled out in that "far-right" extremist group you can find at the link below.
"...we hold one common belief: more gun control equals lost elections. We don't want a repeat of 1994."
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/03/08/9486... #
I support the second amendment. That does not mean that I support everyone's right to own a machine gun. I own several guns and not to boast, I can shoot pretty well and I enjoy it. I have no intenton of turning my guns over to the government and I do not know ONE Democrat around here who is willing to (or advocating for that) either. I suspect the vast majority of Republicans support the same basic things that I do.
Obama,(and every THINKING person) realizes that there is no legislation that is going to completely protect kids from a nut with or without a gun hell bent on killing them.
I do not however think it is unreasonable to limit magazine sizes and outlaw those already in circulation, anymore than it is unreasonable to limit public access to dynamite.
Where I and what I call the gun nuts differ is that I KNOW without a doubt that IF my government sends the U.S. military after me, it will not matter what weapons I have, they will capture me or kill me if they wish to. These idiots think the military that defeated the Nazis and the Japanese, will be cowed by the awesome firepower located in their basement.
If reasonable gun owners would shut those folks up, they would do their cause and the second amendment a big favor.

I do not know what the answer is to preventing another Newtown or Columbine...but I don't subscribe to the notion that the answer is more guns, unless those guns are in the hands of trained professionals.
Overtaxed

Thorn Hill, TN

#62677 Jan 17, 2013
NTMD8OR wrote:
<quoted text>
To me, those "executive orders" looked more like his personal to do list than orders.
There is something we can agree on !

Somebody should have told Rush !

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#62678 Jan 17, 2013
I'll keep my high capacity magazine loaded, in my pistol, in my nightstand next to me. I'll use any new 10-round magazines when I'm shooting cans or targets in the woods. No outrage here.

There's no conceivable way they could (or would) come and confiscate unregistered gun accessories that I own, and I won't throw a tantrum over the "inevitability" of such an impossible scenario.

Same as in the 90s -- our assault rifles will be worth double or triple what they were when we originally purchased them.
dubb

Damascus, VA

#62680 Jan 17, 2013
Amazing wrote:
<quoted text>
The only person who is going to change your predicament is you. Do you honestly think that a supposed tax break for the wealthy is keeping you from paying your electric bill or from buying any type of medication you need? All the things you list you are responsible for. So go do something about it and quit relying on others to handle it for you.
Amazing You totaly missed the point dumb ass, got to be a retarded repub, even a dem is not that stupid, lmfao, I did I have Gold and silver!! what do you have worthless federal reserve notes, LMAO

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#62681 Jan 17, 2013
Nuh wrote:
If you are ever in Chattanooga and like fried chicken - or tamales, you gotta check out Champy's! Just ate there for lunch and here's a write up about it online.(An no - I don't own it LOL).
http://www.nooga.com/159505/restaurant-roamin...
Isn't there a "Champy's" restaurant in Nashville? And didn't the Owner relocate after "Katrina" hit New Orleans? I may be wrong about that, but I think I read that somewhere.

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#62682 Jan 17, 2013
tpxer wrote:
<quoted text>
WHAT family? Who would admit it?
I thought real people LEARN. So he has probably lost some advertising with each new idiocy. And those 20 million are not really listening. Most can hear but they are not listening.
Lol! Well, I know that he has a Mother because she's the One who revealed that he has a chronic "Boil", I think, or something like that, on his backside (Ass), that won't heal and it made him ineligible for the Military draft, when we had it...and that he flunked out of College, if memory serves.
She revealed all of this not that long ago, so I assume she's still living.

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#62683 Jan 17, 2013
The Original Amused wrote:
I'll keep my high capacity magazine loaded, in my pistol, in my nightstand next to me. I'll use any new 10-round magazines when I'm shooting cans or targets in the woods. No outrage here.
There's no conceivable way they could (or would) come and confiscate unregistered gun accessories that I own, and I won't throw a tantrum over the "inevitability" of such an impossible scenario.
Same as in the 90s -- our assault rifles will be worth double or triple what they were when we originally purchased them.
You are absolutely right! I had already thought of the ones who already own them...your assets will increase "a bunch", so what are you complaining about?
Honestly

Beechgrove, TN

#62684 Jan 17, 2013
Overtaxed wrote:
<quoted text>
1) No they are not owned only by Republicans, many Dems own stocks in them. The difference is that Democrats put PEOPLE above these companies. No matter what Mitt said corporations are not people. They are created to do one thing, make money. They have no heart and no soul and they think nothing of grinding people up and spitting them out if it suits them monetarily. Something needs to be a check on their power and that task falls to government.
2) You will never convince ME that unearned income is somehow more valuable than honest labor. Especially since it is Republicans who claim to revere work...as long as someone else does it for them.
3) I endeavor to "live by the New Testament", I wrote endeavor because I fall short many times a day. Republicans wish to return to life under the law as they simultaneously claim to be "Christians" ....a bit hypocritical isn't it ??
By the statement:"The difference is that Democrats put PEOPLE above these companies." DO you mean put them on welfare and food stamps? OH MY I guess you will pay for it with your vote. Have a good day lib.

“IMNTBHO”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#62686 Jan 17, 2013
Well this story has been out for weeks now and I don't believe I have seen our resident Liberal link poster put up anything on it. So. here it is. Your Democrats in action.

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/01/15/ap-...

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#62687 Jan 17, 2013
Overtaxed wrote:
<quoted text> I support the second amendment. That does not mean that I support everyone's right to own a machine gun. I own several guns and not to boast, I can shoot pretty well and I enjoy it. I have no intenton of turning my guns over to the government and I do not know ONE Democrat around here who is willing to (or advocating for that) either. I suspect the vast majority of Republicans support the same basic things that I do.
Obama,(and every THINKING person) realizes that there is no legislation that is going to completely protect kids from a nut with or without a gun hell bent on killing them.
I do not however think it is unreasonable to limit magazine sizes and outlaw those already in circulation, anymore than it is unreasonable to limit public access to dynamite.
Where I and what I call the gun nuts differ is that I KNOW without a doubt that IF my government sends the U.S. military after me, it will not matter what weapons I have, they will capture me or kill me if they wish to. These idiots think the military that defeated the Nazis and the Japanese, will be cowed by the awesome firepower located in their basement.
If reasonable gun owners would shut those folks up, they would do their cause and the second amendment a big favor.
I do not know what the answer is to preventing another Newtown or Columbine...but I don't subscribe to the notion that the answer is more guns, unless those guns are in the hands of trained professionals.
Excellent Post, OT! SEAL Team 6, alone, could take out any Rambo- Wannabe in this Country AND his Basement full of High-Powered Weapons, if the Orders ever came down...which they won't!
This is nothing, but an hysterical, paranoid reaction coming from these Guys, basically over NOTHING!
Honestly

Beechgrove, TN

#62685 Jan 17, 2013
Overtaxed wrote:
Topix is reporting this morning that that stellar member of congress Michelle Bachman has been unable to find anyone to co-sponsor her bill to repeal Obamacare....the genius of the lower chamber is apparently unaware that the other 30 some odd times that the house repealed Obamacare did nothing to stop the ACA since the Senate would not even take up repeal and if they did and passed it Obama assured congress he would veto it.
This woman who claims to stand for fiscal responsibility in government wishes to add to the 50 million dollars the House has already wasted repealing the ACA. What is that definition of insanity again ???
OOOPS...I forgot, it is only Democrats that are guilty of wasting taxpayer's money....
First "ACA"????????

Does this ring a bell. The house has the purse strings. All they got to do is vote no to appropriations for OBAMACARE. Nothing would work. They don't even have to go through the Senate where ditry harry will not put his majority to the test by voting. This gives the senators a out when they want your vote by telling you they did not vote for or against a bill.. Convenient huh,, and it applies to both parties. Have you heard the Repub Senators trying to change or get a vote. No they like their DEM associates, just laugh in silence.

Yes, it is just like OBAMA spending 75 Million to implement the 23 exec orders he signed yesterday.

“IMNTBHO”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#62688 Jan 17, 2013
Overtaxed wrote:
<quoted text> There is something we can agree on !
Somebody should have told Rush !
Just proves the old saying that even a Liberal... errrr clock is right twice a day. LOL

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#62689 Jan 17, 2013
Nuh wrote:
If a man says he'll fix it, he WILL. There is no need to go and remind him every dang six months about it
Lol! I get what you just said, but I don't think anybody else did! Are you trying to say that a Man will fix it sometime this Century, so there's no need to keep pressuring him about it every Decade? LMAO!

As Dunlapian keeps reminding me, it's that Man's "Box" mentality, kicking in, again. One thing at a time, is all a Man can think about or deal with, and everything has to wait until he clears than One "Box" out of his mind. Then, he'll go to the next "Box" and start working on clearing it out of his Mind. You gotta love 'em...but they only think about one thing, at a time, and everything else is wiped out of their thinking, while they're doing that.
If I can find that Video, explaining how a Man's Mind and thinking differs from a Woman's, I'll post it. It's hilarious...but accurate! Lol!

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#62690 Jan 17, 2013
Nuh wrote:
If a man says he'll fix it, he WILL. There is no need to go and remind him every dang six months about it
Here it is! LMAO!

Since: Jan 13

Terre Haute, IN

#62691 Jan 17, 2013
Bill Haslam
Honestly

Beechgrove, TN

#62693 Jan 17, 2013
Overtaxed wrote:
<quoted text> Of course I have unearned income. My point was and IS that the money made in a savings account, real estate, stocks, bonds, etc. is MONEY. That is all it is. I made it without working, yet the tax code treats it more favorably than the money earned by the guy who made his with his hands and his back. NOTHING is more unfair in my opinion.
I see nothing special about unearned income...in fact I think labor deserves a richer reward than "passive capital investment". Obviously, we will need to agree to disagree, since I have come to my determination over many years and you probably have as well...
I tend to agree however, lets explore this a little more..
From what I understand the tax for unearned money is at 15%. Your Dem Billionaire Warren (somebody) stated that he paid less taxes than his secretary. Yes he did! he did not pay payroll taxes just unearned taxes. Apples and Oranges.

If I have invested $1M in a stock, the company I invested in would be the recipient of that money. Like a savings account allowing the bank to use your money, the company could use this money in which ever way their board sees fit. It could be to expand (purchase more equip. and hire more people)or it could be to pay off previous loans. There are a host of things that can be done with it.

What I out of the deal is the interest (dividends) from that money. Should I pay the same as someone who has labored for their paycheck? You say yes!, I say HOW MUCH? Do we pay taxes on these dividends the same as a earned payroll check. SS#, Medicare, withholding, etc.?
If you answer is yes, Take into account that if that company goes belly-up, I lose my Million dollars. If the bank goes bankrupt, your savings is protected up to a point. Ok, we charge all unearned dividends the same as a payroll paycheck. The stock market will fall through the floor immediately because me and others have removed their money from the companies stock. I am not going to pay someone 35-50% tax on unearned income when I have to take all the risk. Why risk it at all. Just keep the $1M and enjoy it. If I have $1M to put into the stock market, I have other businesses that are making that million and they do payroll taxes!

Now the companies no longer have money to expand, hire more workers, payoff old debts, pay for inventory they need to make their product in order to sell it to the public. You talking about a depression here of a massive scale. With more people out of work you are talking about less purchases, less payroll taxes and at some point in time, the gov. either raises taxes or starts shutting/trimming down entitlement spending (i.e welfare, SSN, Obamacare, food stamps, etc.)

My honest opinion is that Yes, we should tax the unearned money a little more from 15% to 20% but to place a payroll tax on it would result in short order a disaster nation wide we the people might not recover from.

To place that 5% on unearned tax might get us 500 Billion a year. Not enough to cover the $1.6 Trillion Obama Spends per year

“IMNTBHO”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#62692 Jan 17, 2013
Overtaxed wrote:
<quoted text> I support the second amendment. That does not mean that I support everyone's right to own a machine gun. I own several guns and not to boast, I can shoot pretty well and I enjoy it. I have no intenton of turning my guns over to the government and I do not know ONE Democrat around here who is willing to (or advocating for that) either. I suspect the vast majority of Republicans support the same basic things that I do.
Obama,(and every THINKING person) realizes that there is no legislation that is going to completely protect kids from a nut with or without a gun hell bent on killing them.
I do not however think it is unreasonable to limit magazine sizes and outlaw those already in circulation, anymore than it is unreasonable to limit public access to dynamite.
Where I and what I call the gun nuts differ is that I KNOW without a doubt that IF my government sends the U.S. military after me, it will not matter what weapons I have, they will capture me or kill me if they wish to. These idiots think the military that defeated the Nazis and the Japanese, will be cowed by the awesome firepower located in their basement.
If reasonable gun owners would shut those folks up, they would do their cause and the second amendment a big favor.
I do not know what the answer is to preventing another Newtown or Columbine...but I don't subscribe to the notion that the answer is more guns, unless those guns are in the hands of trained professionals.
The first thing they would have to find is enough members of the US Military to move against the people. Many soldiers interviewed have stated that they will defend the US Constitution first. Then they have to convince them to move against their families. I don't think Obama is dumb enough to believe that he could turn the military against the people. The next group they have to worry about is the criminal element who will fight before giving up any guns. And they will gain access to the same types weapons that the military will use against them.

By saying it is not unreasonable to outlaw those already in circulation you set the stage for confiscation that could bring more blood to the streets than there already is. It has been proven time and again that making guns illegal does not stop gun violence. Look at Chicago and their gun ban. Last year more people died from gun violence in Chicago than our forces in Afghanistan.

I would like to see all gun crimes be a federal offense with a minimum 10 year jail sentence, no chance of parole. Crime went down in Florida with their 10/20/30 law. The way I heard it explained was this. Simply having possession of gun while committing a crime, whether you show it or not, is 10 years. Brandishing it in the commission of a crime is 20 years. Firing it is 30 and killing with it is life. All with no parole. That is the kind of gun law we need on a national level. Not restricting what law abiding citizens do or making criminals out of law abiding citizens.
Honestly

Beechgrove, TN

#62694 Jan 17, 2013
Really Sassy wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh Dear Lord, how dumb some of you People are! The "Judicial" Branch...i.e., the Supreme Court...ONLY "checks" Laws when the Case is brought before it. The Justices do NOT run around double-checking everything the President and Congress does.
Members of Congress are supposed to know the Constitution AND the Amendments to it...they are given a POCKET COPY when they are sworn in. Now, whether or not they read it or use it as a reference before they vote on an issue is doubtful. Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, a Democrat, was famous for pulling it out of his Breast Pocket and waving it at the other Legislators, when he wanted to make a point in his speeches on the Senate Floor.
The President, along with being a former Constitutional Professor, himself, has Constitutional Attorneys on Staff to advise him on Constitutional Issues, as well as being able to pick up the phone and consult with any Constitutional Expert in the Nation.
I doubt that ANY of them have ever refused to take a call from the President of the United States...this One or any of the Former Ones! Plus, if he wants to for some reason, the President can summon any or all of them to the White House, should he deem it necessary. I don't know that any President ever has, but if One did, YOU DO NOT REFUSE! The President has the Power to have you brought there if he wants to. But, it's considered an Honor to be summoned to the white House and Nobody has ever refused!
So, now that you know just a small fraction of how many Experts on the Constitution are in the White House, on Congressional Staffs, Congressional Committee Staffs, Supreme Justices' Staffs, and easily accessible Nation-wide to any and all Presidents, Congressmen, and Senators, and...all as close as the nearest telephone or down the Hall, it's alittle ludicrous to even think that if the Constitution is being violated, NOBODY in the other Political Party would notice or know it! and you better bet that if the President should do it and the Teapublicans even thought the President was violating the Constitution, they would have filed charges against him before he even finished his speech!
You may be 62-63 and you have become very daft.

You can bet the Judicial sees every piece of NEW Law legislation?

Take that tot the bank! Yes that is their main. The other job just settles suites from lower courts.

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.

Lewisburg Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Old Post Office Building 1 hr I love to eat 11
State of the Union address 6 hr Questions 19
Democrats Ruined America 6 hr duh 3
Speed limit on Bryant Station Road in Culleoka ... 8 hr oompaloompa 3
Who's more racist? White or Black People? 8 hr oompaloompa 12
Tennessee State Troopers Are Bullies 9 hr Report Speeding T... 24
Seen any good tv shows? 18 hr I love to watch TV 2
Lewisburg Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Lewisburg People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 2:30 pm PST

Bleacher Report 2:30PM
2015 Atlanta Falcons Potential Draft Pick Profile: OL Ali Marpet
NFL 6:47 PM
Raiders expected to interview Mike Smith for DC
NBC Sports 7:57 PM
Report: Mike Smith expected to interview with Raiders
Bleacher Report 3:54 PM
2015 Falcons Draft Pick Profile: WR Phillip Dorsett
Bleacher Report 8:55 PM
Falcons Potential Draft Pick: LB Denzel Perryman