(V): Um. I said "I've seen".... and "apparently".. Nothing about "think" or "know"

Übergeek 바둑이: Nah, I've seen plenty of left wingers who apparently haven't even graduated high school.

The Col: Again, that's fine. If the idiocy that comes from "the other side" is just as equally confronted.

OR if not confronted, then they shouldn't whine it works the other way too.

Tuesday: ??? Seems to me it IS plenty of people who do it?

Tuesday: Well I of course meant the people who would giggle about similar comments made about her, yet get a bit uppity about her making such comments.

The Col: I don't disagree. Most politicians do get it and give it. Some like to make it sound like it's one sided though.

Tuesday: Ahh. Yeah, gotcha. Of course.

Tuesday: Yet people can make just as vicious comments about her, and it's ok?

Übergeek 바둑이: Yes! All of it! It is all done so inefficiently! I could deal with compromise!
I don't expect to not pay any taxes. I work hard (as do most people) and I don't want my money squandered.
There are SO many things that the US govt has their hands in, where it just doesn't belong. Some things could certainly be done on a more local level. (State/County/City)

Obviously that wouldn't include military. That NEEDS to be federal. It's one of the parts that bothers me least, personally.

I'm just disgusted by the waste. That infuriates me. If I waste my own money, I pay for it dearly. But that's just it. I personally wasted it. Someone else wasting my money? No thanks.

Personally, I'm fine with how healthcare always has been, for the most part. There are things that need looking at, of course! But for the government to basically take it over? No no! It's going to become a mess. And DEFINITELY if it means gourmet menus in hospitals, free room and board for relatives in there, and 3 day stays for relatively minor procedures!

And you say historically, privatization has not always been the best solution. Well, I'd say government bureaucracy has been the best solution even less. (Hmm, really bad sentence)

Übergeek 바둑이: I must say that I would not be happy with Case #2 either! There is no reason for government to pay for a hotel like hospital stay with gourmet menus! And a 3 day stay sounds a bit extensive. Of course being pushed out too soon, is not appealing either. But that sounds a bit wasteful.

If someone can personally afford that sort of care, fine! Let them pay for it. But no, I would not like my tax money being wasted to that extent.

Less Govt. Less Govt. Less Govt!!!

(V): NO answer that EVER disagrees with you is "straight" in your mind.

(V): Not even close to what I said. Maybe someone else will dance with you now.

(V): And as usual, you are giving the image that you argue, simply for the sake of arguing. Round and round and round. I can't be bothered with the silliness. I'm not getting into a mud slinging with you.

(V): U have no idea what my understanding is. You just don't read everything completely?

And yes, unfortunately there is really no way around it. All of us will have to sacrifice in some way to fix all the damage that has been done, by those who wanted to turn things this way.

(V): Um, no it isn't. I say ship back every illegal immigrant.
There are obviously plenty of CITIZENS who need work. If they have to work at minimum wage for a while, because they can't get their preferred job? SO BE IT. I'd certainly do it before sitting on my rear end and taking handouts from the government for 99 weeks.

NO ONE takes care of ME, except ME.

God how many times does it need to be said? People CAN and SHOULD be able to get help occasionally, if they need it. But the kind of help being given out right now is NOT reasonable. Most who go beyond what any thinking/sane/reasonable person would see as reasonable are LAZY and TAKING advantage of those of us who are HARD workers and would do WHATever it takes to take care of ourselves and our families before turning for help.

(V): Little insults will kindly be left off this board? No? I suggest they are.

As I said, a little help is one thing. 99 weeks or more is WAY beyond a little help.

And yes, unfortunately there is really no way around it. All of us will have to sacrifice in some way to fix all the damage that has been done, by those who wanted to turn things this way.

Can't really say I have a problem with people working for minimum wage though, for a while, if that's what NEEDS to be done. Perhaps give them a little LESS help then, rather than paying what we are paying now for them to sit around and be "picky" about what they do for work?

Übergeek 바둑이: So? people learned the language and culture eventually, didn't they?

If you cater to everyone like all the "politically correct" people want to do, there is no reason for them to work to adapt. They can just go on and on like they did where they came from. Plus now they expect to be taken care of too! It wasn't like that 100 years ago!

No thanks.

(V): People need to take care of THEMSELVES.

I don't turn to any government to take care of ME. I work hard and pay my bills.

Someone can certainly need HELP from time to time. And I'm all for that. But 99 weeks of unemployment compensation is WAY beyond reasonable. It's not MY duty to take care of someone like that forever.

I don't care about relocation costs / minimum wage. You DO what you have to DO to take care of yourself and your family.

Tuesday: I can't stand Bush either, and definitely didn't vote for him. So put that in your hat before you get all high n mighty.

And I don't care who they became unemployed under. (Though, HMMMMM, 99 weeks is about 2 years, no?) They need to get back to work doing SOMETHING. We shouldn't be paying for THAT long.

And again, you're making assumptions. I am NOT a republican.

(V): Yes, perfect for the ones who have been unemployed for 99 weeks who whine about unemployment benefits ending.

Bernice: Perfect! This is what I say about our country, and pretty much I think how everyone should feel about their own.

Come here? ADAPT!. Don't like it? LEAVE!

Artful Dodger: It won't be debated on this board. You responding to what you see as baits makes you just as guilty. This board is about to go on approval status. So please, start off 2011 behaving.

If this continues to turn personal, all participants WILL be banned. Thank you.

Artful Dodger: Hail Queen Kim!

(V): Um follow the subject line. I wasn't commenting on that post.

(V): Ridiculous

Übergeek 바둑이: All the more reason to be sure each one is severely punished

Artful Dodger: I don't trust him as far as I could throw him.

Artful Dodger: Personally, I think it could be even more devious than that.

Artful Dodger: That's right. ("wimpy prez") I wouldn't be surprise if his inactivity is quite planned.

Artful Dodger: Yet people in charge (led by the useless Obama) do practically NOTHING

Artful Dodger: Personally, I say take him out. As well as the traitor who gave him the info.

Bernice: What does that have to do with (V)'s comparison to our constitution? He is NOT protected under our constitution. He is an enemy of the U.S. and should be treated as such.

(V): Are you for real? For one, he is not a U.S. citizen, and is NOT protected under OUR constitution.

Übergeek 바둑이: I believe in tax breaks for EVERYONE. People who work hard, who have invested smartly, who inherited it, WHATEVER, all deserve to keep as much of it as possible. Our government does NOT use it wisely, and they should not be using as much as they are.

Übergeek 바둑이: NO. The government is TOO big. We don't need more taxes. We need smaller government and less government spending. Like you, I can call the people that believe the democrats' silly ideology and vote for it dumb, as well.

The Col: Who did they poll? Nimrods who don't understand economics? And any Fox poll is no worse than any other poll that would be quoted. They are all pretty commonly skewed to show whatever view the poller is hoping to show.

Still can't deny that the recent election certainly showed that "vast numbers" do NOT agree with what the wonderful Libs/Obama have been up to. I suppose this doesn't automatically narrow it down to this specific tax situation as many people aren't able to think enough to realize that it is these people "earning $250,000 and higher" are the ones who create the jobs that everyone needs and if they are taxed even more, the unemployment situation is only going to get worse.

The Col: And I'm sure someone else could find a poll with higher numbers and lower numbers too. Fact remains that "vast numbers" do NOT support the recent direction that our federal govt. had been heading.

And yes, Obama is incompetent. He is "rolling over" because he sees it as possibly his only chance to continue torturing our country after 2012. I hope it doesn't work.

The Col: If a "vast number" of our citizens agreed with our incompetent president, why did we vote in droves to empty as much as possible, the House of his cronies? The numbers agreeing aren't THAT vast.

Mousetrap: And? my innocent child has to be subjected to having a total strangers hands put in areas that I have told them they should always report if someone touches them, because it's wrong?

(Hypothetical of course, as I have no kids.. )

Artful Dodger: You took the words right out of my mouth.. err fingers.

Übergeek 바둑이: When they do something for others (like give money to charity) it is either out of guilt, fear of hell, or to cash in a nice tax break.

Is that why you give to charity? WOW. It's not why I do.

I'm assuming you didn't TRULY intend to make such a broad generalization?

Artful Dodger: Hopefully Hannity's prediction that this week will change this whole thing, is true.

Don't you 2 even start the personal stuff, or you will both be banned. ONLY warning. And there is also no need to debate this post here on this board. Thank you.

(V): This isn't about "drug mules". This is about terrorists. Frankly, I'm even MORE against my child being poked and prodded to stop the influx of drugs. They did not increase this because of drugs.

Artful Dodger: This should be an interesting week, with Thanksgiving traveling.

Artful Dodger: Other side of the coin, I suppose : What if they KNOW we won't check such people thoroughly and they find a way to use that to their advantage?

(V): Overuse of "constitution"? That is disgusting!

(V): "Recent Ads"??? I saw examples tonight of negative ads from even back in the late 1700's and early 1800's. It's hardly a "recent" phenomenon. I can't remember now who it was about, but they had ads about a candidate's mom being a "whore". I bet we wouldn't even see something THAT nasty, now.

Artful Dodger: Too bad it won't be bye bye Reid