Send a Message
to Booker Tee

Comments

69

Joined

Feb 27, 2013

Booker Tee's Favorites

Booker Tee Profile

Recent Posts

Murray, KY

Eastwood Christain academy

Child abuse? I laughed out loud when I read that. You haven't a clue dude. Just another anonymous coward knocking something they really and truly know nothing about.  (May 29, 2013 | post #17)

Murray, KY

Eastwood Christain academy

I can't even begin to tell you how many of the above comments are misrepresentations , half truths, and out right lies. I personally know several people that teach there and they are the real deal. They genuinely love the students and try to teach them moral precepts that would do a lot of people who post their garbage on here pretty good. Yes it is a Christian school that teaches a Christian world view. If you don't approve of that then it would be best to send your children to another school. As for preparing them for college, I personally know a graduate in nursing school now that is very well prepared and another that is a nurse in another state. Not all children excel in school, public or private.  (May 29, 2013 | post #15)

Murray, KY

God

hey troll, nice perversion of the Bible. Genesis 6:4-"There were giants on the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came into the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown." I try not to be rude on here and only say things I would if I were talking to someone in person, sooo, you're an idiot. Misunderstanding of the bible is one thing, purposely trying to deceive others is another. People don't have to believe it, but respect of those who do isn't asking too much.  (Mar 25, 2013 | post #3)

Murray, KY

shut up women

I do find it interesting that many on the left will pile on a misrepresentation of the Bible and call you a racist, tea bagger, Islamaphobe, or intolerant when you criticize Islam's archaic and cruel beliefs concerning women. Or, on the secular side, a rap song that regularly refers to women as b*****s is just an "artists " expressing themselves. That's ok. Hypocrites.  (Mar 23, 2013 | post #17)

Murray, KY

shut up women

Exactly right. I believe the original poster was not a Christian zealot but one who enjoys stirring the proverbial pot. Imagine that..on topix! Shocked!  (Mar 23, 2013 | post #11)

Murray, KY

Proud to be a Kentuckian

really? Do you think Im referring to taxing the public for roads as income redistribution? I don't think you are understanding what I'm trying to say. Of course I'm referring to excessively taxing the wealthy to redistribute to the lower income through goverment programs. Also, central planning didnt make this country great, freedom made this country great. Please don't refer to yourself as a conservative ever again.  (Mar 20, 2013 | post #58)

Murray, KY

Proud to be a Kentuckian

(Again, I turn your proposition around and ask if Joe is successful and "enjoys the fruits of his labors", why would he want a struggling single mother pay more than she already does?) You're asking a philosophical question rather than an economic one. The 10% tax rate was just an example anyway. The point is it's not Joe's concern. Joe is simply making a living for his family. what you're implying if I understand you correctly is a form of wealth redistribution. I do understand the concern for Susie. I do care for a struggling single mother, an unemployed factory worker, or a 22 yr old fresh out of college living on chicken soup. However opportunity and the freedom to pursue happiness is all our government was intended to do in this aspect. Anything more and you have the mess we are in now. Central planning is a dud. Free enterprise isn't so free when the government tries to interfere too much.  (Mar 20, 2013 | post #56)

Murray, KY

Proud to be a Kentuckian

AKT, why do we need to worry with what rate any of us pay as long as its the same percentage? If Joe has the smarts, the work ethic, or the fortitude to stick with his dream of being a business owner and succeeds, and then from his success enjoys the fruits of his labors (as long as its ethical and honest) then why do the ones that haven't made it there yet want to make him pay more? Why have we as a country insisted that we take as much incentive as possible away from those who are successful? At least with the flat tax everybody knows that they will be taxed at an equal level. Your example that Susie may pay more in "other taxes" is just not valid. She pays the same prices for gas and groceries as Joe. Will it be harder on her income to fill her tank with gas? Sure. Does that mean we punish Joe because Susie is struggling with gas money? Of course not. What about Joe's hidden taxes and expenses from running his shoe factory? Regulations, city and state taxes, high insurance, environmental impact studies on the land his company had to go on, and it goes on and on and on. Who do we tax to cover Joe for providing the people of Joes town with jobs? The government should never be in the business of insuring that everyone is equal in regards to money. The government should only give those that are willing the opportunity to succeed.  (Mar 20, 2013 | post #50)

Murray, KY

Proud to be a Kentuckian

You lost me when you said you had conservative leanings and then went on to call for a progressive tax system. By a "progressive tax" you mean the wealthy pay a higher percent, then that is neither fair or conservative. If we are talking fair, then we should be talking a flat tax. Example: Joe owns a shoe factory. He made 2 million last year. At a tax rate of 10% Joe will pay $200,000 in taxes. Tom is a factory worker. He made $30,000 last year. At the same 10 percent tax rate, he will owe Uncle Sam $3000. Finally there is a single mom named Susie. She struggles at a minimum wage job and made $15,000 last year. Again at the flat tax rate of 10 percent she will pay $1500. There are no tax loopholes, no complicated tax code, only one paying in accordance to what they earned. So the rich dude pays 200 grand. The struggling mom only pays 1500. That is truly everyone paying their fair share. When you ask the top wage earners to pay at a higher rate, you are asking them to subsidize someone else which is immoral. Coercion should not be part of a tax policy for benevolence sake. That has never been conservatism.  (Mar 20, 2013 | post #47)

Murray, KY

Proud to be a Kentuckian

Btw, I will read that book. I read everything I can. Thanks for suggesting it. I highly recommend Theodore and Woodrow by Andrew Napolitano. It's eye opening.  (Mar 19, 2013 | post #44)

Murray, KY

Proud to be a Kentuckian

Pat Buchanan, senior advisor under Nixon, Ford, and Reagan, say just the opposite. Also, if Reagan was the irresponsible radical spender as you claim, do you honestly think that conservatives and libertarians would revere him so much? Or, were they all blinded by his exceptional speaking ability? This argument is not really worth debate IMO. Rand Paul was the topic. What exactly is your problem with him specifically? Also, for the sake of trying to figure out your political leanings, what would you classify yourself as? Definately not conservative or libertarian. Progressive I assume?  (Mar 19, 2013 | post #43)

Murray, KY

Proud to be a Kentuckian

LOL Whacko libertarian ideas huh? I guess a constitutional conservative is considered a whacko these days? Throw me in the looney house now I guess. I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for leaving the GOP. Please take Karl Rove with you.  (Mar 19, 2013 | post #40)

Murray, KY

Proud to be a Kentuckian

Are you implying that Reagan facilitated all the spending? That's just not true. Reagan facilitated the closing of tax loopholes as part of a pending deal but rarely ever proposed spending increases himself outside of crucial defense spending. The big spenders have always been the democrats until the modern RINO republicans have taken over. Cue Rand Paul to begin to challenge that.  (Mar 19, 2013 | post #39)

Murray, KY

Proud to be a Kentuckian

Reagan made a deal with the devil in the name of Tip O'neal, democratic speaker of the house at the time. Reagan wanted spending cuts, the democratic house wanted tax hikes. The "deal" was a trade off. Reagan would raise taxes and the dems would cut spending. Guess who broke the deal?  (Mar 19, 2013 | post #36)

Murray, KY

Proud to be a Kentuckian

True, but it certainly doesn't make them wrong or immoral either. It does at least show they aren't crooked which is more than you can say about far too many politicians these days. In my mind my ideas are right. In your mind your ideas are right. Kentucky elected him because of his ideas, therefore agree or disagree, he is doing what he is supposed to do.  (Mar 19, 2013 | post #35)