Remove this ad

avatar

ohitsyou

Living Spambot

Posts: 500

#781 [url]

Mar 14 17 8:17 PM

Trumps tax return was released by Rachel Maddow. Turns out, not also was Trump succesful with his business, but he paid more in taxes precentage wise then Obama or Sanders did!


Awww, life is good.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,959

#783 [url]

Mar 15 17 9:16 AM

Long Tom wrote:
​But the Democratic party is making itself look more ridiculous than ever as they try to find every scapegoat possible for the reason they have been doing so badly lately, rather than seeing the obvious...namely, the common people have lost faith in them. Which explains my "Excitement Is Running High" thread.
They have turned too much of the media into an echo chamber and have been buying their own bullshit for almost 9 straight years. If they accepted they have been rejected for who they are by the American people, they have to acknowledge what a complete and total failure Obama was as a leader, possibly even recognizing his corrupt behavior (e.g. Fast and Furious, spending one billion dollars on a website with less functionality than a WordPress site, Solyndra, the VA scandal, etc. etc. etc. etc.). They can't do that! That's racist!
.
Shan wrote:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/14/donald-trump-tax-return-leaked-alternative-minimum
Since you didn't put any explanation for this article, I'm assuming you wanted to discuss how the left always finds a way to spin everything Trump does. They frame his getting rid of a tax as a purely selfish act, while ignoring that the tax only impacts people who didn't shift their earnings off-shore (like leftists-run companies like Google and Facebook) or 2) use a "charity" to hold their property and pay their bills (like the Clintons).

.


Issues composing posts in Yuku's editor?  See this guide to using BBCode.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,962

#784 [url]

Mar 15 17 3:36 PM

There's no explanation for the article so people can read it free and clear because not everything's an invitation to a throwdown.

I had not heard of the AMT (Alternative Minimum Tax) and now I have. Very informative in that regards.

Quote    Reply   

#785 [url]

Mar 21 17 1:30 PM

Looks like Trump is trying to shave off 31% of the EPAs budget. Not gonna happen but hopefully he'll shave off something.

_____________________________________________________________________

People have a common defense mechanism they employ to defend themselves from the threat of contrary viewpoints. This shield they wield is the act of dismissing such contrary viewpoints by arbitrarily undermining their validity.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,962

#786 [url]

Mar 21 17 2:41 PM

Horerczy wrote:
Looks like Trump is trying to shave off 31% of the EPAs budget. Not gonna happen but hopefully he'll shave off something.

Why?

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Long Tom

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,101

#787 [url]

Mar 21 17 3:51 PM

Shan wrote:

Horerczy wrote:
Looks like Trump is trying to shave off 31% of the EPAs budget. Not gonna happen but hopefully he'll shave off something.

Why?

Ever heard the term "pork-barrel spending"?

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,962

#788 [url]

Mar 21 17 3:57 PM

Long Tom wrote:

Shan wrote:

Horerczy wrote:
Looks like Trump is trying to shave off 31% of the EPAs budget. Not gonna happen but hopefully he'll shave off something.

Why?

Ever heard the term "pork-barrel spending"?

1. Yes. How exactly does the EPA fall under this?
​2. We have a request for approval to start a review that's 4+ days old.

http://badwebcomicswikiforum.yuku.com/topic/353/Computer-Love?page=4#.WNG9N4VOLIU

​(Posts 70 and 71)

Quote    Reply   
avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,959

#789 [url]

Mar 22 17 1:51 PM

Shan wrote:
Horerczy wrote:
Looks like Trump is trying to shave off 31% of the EPAs budget. Not gonna happen but hopefully he'll shave off something.
Why?
The left in our country use the various bureaucracies as a means to get what they want outside of the democratic process. Eliminating jobs in any bureaucracy reduces their ability to abuse the American people without consequence. It's similar to their endless resistance to laws requiring people to have voter IDs which would prevent illegal aliens and other non-citizens from voting.

.


Issues composing posts in Yuku's editor?  See this guide to using BBCode.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

kyrtuck

Heavy User

Posts: 208

#790 [url]

Mar 22 17 2:46 PM

ohitsyou wrote:
Trumps tax return was released by Rachel Maddow. Turns out, not also was Trump succesful with his business, but he paid more in taxes precentage wise then Obama or Sanders did!


Awww, life is good.


Whoa, that's a bigly logical fallacy there.  

If Trump really had paid a bigger percentage than Bernie and Obama, then he would've released his tax returns much sooner, and woulda bragged all about it when he was campaigning.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
avatar

ohitsyou

Living Spambot

Posts: 500

#791 [url]

Mar 23 17 6:14 AM

kyrtuck wrote:

ohitsyou wrote:
Trumps tax return was released by Rachel Maddow. Turns out, not also was Trump succesful with his business, but he paid more in taxes precentage wise then Obama or Sanders did!


Awww, life is good.


Whoa, that's a bigly logical fallacy there.  

If Trump really had paid a bigger percentage than Bernie and Obama, then he would've released his tax returns much sooner, and woulda bragged all about it when he was campaigning.

Becuase his tax return is his personel information, so he has every right to not release them. Also, I heard its not good to show your tax returns when youre being audited, so theres that.

I mean, how is this any different when people asked for Obama's birth certificate? I thought it was stupid and pointless when the right did that, so why wouldnt I think this tax return "scandal" is any less stupid? Also, good luck trying to fool the IRS, especially when youre an obvious billionaire.

The left cant keep on doing this "Boy who Cried Wolf" situation. I mean, whats going to happen when an actual scandal happens? People are going to be numb to it, and not treat it like a big deal.


 

Quote    Reply   
avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,959

#792 [url]

Mar 23 17 2:09 PM

kyrtuck wrote:
If Trump really had paid a bigger percentage than Bernie and Obama, then he would've released his tax returns much sooner, and woulda bragged all about it when he was campaigning.
That's a false dichotomy. You're presenting only two possible explanations for something with multiple explanations.
.
ohitsyou wrote:
The left cant keep on doing this "Boy who Cried Wolf" situation. I mean, whats going to happen when an actual scandal happens? People are going to be numb to it, and not treat it like a big deal.
It's getting to the point Trump could literally grease the White House floors with butter and slide naked between meetings on video, and nobody would believe it outside of the tiny percentage of the psychotic left and the elderly who still watch the major news networks.

.


Issues composing posts in Yuku's editor?  See this guide to using BBCode.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

ohitsyou

Living Spambot

Posts: 500

#793 [url]

Mar 24 17 3:44 PM

@Smash

I know, right? If the left keep it up, Trump could get away with genocide and no one would believe the left if they said it. In fact, that worries me, as I want Trump to at least be held accountable when he screws up. 

What I dont get is why Liberals do not put effort into finding dirt on Trump. The only thing I can think of is:

A. Trump dosent have much in the way of dirty secrets. (Even I doubt that.)

B. Liberals are lazy and would rather use emotion then doing research.

Thats the advantage of thinking with your fee-fees all the time; you can emotionally tell yourself that everyone wrong with the world is everyone else's fault, and you dont need things like research or facts, cuz working takes effort.
 

Quote    Reply   

#794 [url]

Mar 24 17 4:02 PM

RyanCare been pulled out just before the congress have a chance to kill it.

What they should've done is to keep their mouth shut and gradually replace the damn thing instead of going at it in huge chunks. Bits and pieces of it will have to go through congress since it's too big and ambitious to go through without drawing too much attention.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,959

#795 [url]

Mar 24 17 11:26 PM

They should just completely destroy the thing instead of pretending there's some great bureaucracy that has to be carefully unbundled. "The previous system wasn't perfect! BAWWWW!" Obamacare is terrible and unsustainable; there's no reason to stick with it when there's a better option to go back to.

You would never see these kinds of excuses applied outside of government, where people don't have a vested interest in lying to themselves to keep their side in power.

.


Issues composing posts in Yuku's editor?  See this guide to using BBCode.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

SmashLampjaw

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,959

#797 [url]

Apr 5 17 10:53 PM

Fantastic. At this rate radical Islam's going to keep chugging along until we have another Crusade, except with atheists and agnostics thrown in alongside the Christians who haven't been duped into thinking their religion is communist.

Also, I would like to remind certain people to stop fucking derailing threads to get people's attention. If you need people somewhere just PM them.

.


Issues composing posts in Yuku's editor?  See this guide to using BBCode.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,962

#798 [url]

Apr 6 17 12:06 AM

I'm going to argue that this was peak political convergence hence its posting here. I mean, this nonsense was born in the last great political battle of recent memory, wasn't it? I did think about this before I did it, just saying.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Shan

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,962

#799 [url]

Apr 6 17 12:52 AM

I don't really know why things need to be so complicated especially since virtually everyone was in favour of it but more of this working across the aisle, please.

[url=

Quote    Reply   
avatar

plarblman

Living Spambot

Posts: 1,167

#800 [url]

Apr 6 17 5:19 PM

Devil's advocate: It's pretty damn hard to be partisan about the issue of rape. Especially when most voters are women. So I wouldn't read that much into this.

Also, it's worth noting that rape kits are of fairly limited value. All they do is prove that sexual intercourse happened, not whether it was consensual or not. I'm not saying their useless, just that if the defendant has already claimed that sex did happen and that it was consenual, then there really isn't anything that a rape kit will do to help a case.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help