Ann Coulter will campaign for Hillary if McCain is the nominee

[Kryptix]

:whoa: Is this a sign of how much the Republican party has been damaged over the years?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/01/ann-coulter-ill-campaig_n_84435.html

Last night on "Hannity & Colmes," Ann Coulter made a striking announcement: she'll campaign for Hillary Clinton if John McCain is the Republican nominee. Earlier this week, the New York Observer's Jennifer Rubin reported that members of the conservative punditry were "beside themselves" over the thought of a McCain nomination, but Coulter's pronouncement is a new, and surprising, development. Watch her explain her rationale to Sean Hannity, while Alan Colmes can only sit back and laugh:
YouTube - Coulter: I'll campaign for Hillary if McCain is the nominee

[whitebread]

it seems to me that this would help him more than hurt him

[Kryptix]

it seems to me that this would help him more than hurt him

I think it depends on who McCain is campaigning for. The hard-core conservatives or the moderates. Ann Coulter is a big voice and a lot of people listen to her. For the first time I actually agree with her on something. :lol:

[BAMF]

I think it depends on who McCain is campaigning for. The hard-core conservatives or the moderates. Ann Coulter is a big voice and a lot of people listen to her. For the first time I actually agree with her on something. :lol:

People listen to Ann Coulter?! :lmao: She is crazier than Bill O'Riley!


Good, give her to Hillary, then you can have TWO crazy bitches putting their foots in their mouths every time they speak. I'm all for it! Aww, fuck it, McCain '08!

[Kryptix]

People listen to Ann Coulter?! :lmao: She is crazier than Bill O'Riley!


Good, give her to Hillary, then you can have TWO crazy bitches putting their foots in their mouths every time they speak. I'm all for it! Aww, fuck it, McCain '08!

I find your support for McCain baffling. To my understanding, it seems you would be supporting Romney because, from what I hear, McCain doesn't know much about the economy.

[BAMF]

I find your support for McCain baffling. To my understanding, it seems you would be supporting Romney because, from what I hear, McCain doesn't know much about the economy.

Its alright if you don't know much about the economy and as a result are going to (presumabely) hire cabinet members who do to tell you about it. Its a whole seperate issue if you're some fucking wackjob who THINKS you know about an economy and are aiming to pursue fucked up ideas which will lead the country into ruin.

Plus, Mit isn't going to win. I'm gonna throw my support to the best potental canidate.

[jabtay]

Haha..i was fixing to post this. It amazes me that she actually said Hillary was more conservative than mccain :lmao:

[dan]

why does anyone give any sort of credibility to ann coulter? she's just some whackjob like one of us, except she's famous and people actually believe the sewage pouring out of her mouth. :nono:

she's just a regular person, why the fuck does anyone care what she has to say?

[Kryptix]

why does anyone give any sort of credibility to ann coulter? she's just some whackjob like one of us, except she's famous and people actually believe the sewage pouring out of her mouth. :nono:

she's just a regular person, why the fuck does anyone care what she has to say?

I agree. I just found it surprising for her to support a Democrat. But she also is a big supporter of Bush and Bush supports Hillary which I also find surprising.

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

Ann Coulter has more balls than most the guys on this board.

[soprannaUSF]

Mann Coulter also has more political herpes than most guys on this board. I despise that bitch.

[Miles]

why anyone listens to that batshit crazy fuckwad is beyond me.

i'd give a write-in vote to ralph fucking nader before i'd ever vote for hillary, and i'm a registered republican. so... do the math there.

[spoonfed]

WOW! just wow.

[PPGMD]

If you are going to write in, put Ross Perot.

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

I agree with her in that I won't vote for McCain.

If McCain is the nominee then I'll go third party or write in or I'll just stay home.

But I can't vote for Hillary. It isn't that I believe Hillary will ever get her ridiculous socialist health care implemented or her stupid "it takes a village" bullshit, it is more that I do not want to give those views my stamp of approval by voting for her.

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

Mann Coulter also has more political herpes than most guys on this board. I despise that bitch.

I don't know what political herpes is. I guess it's something that flares up once in a while?

[BAMF]

I agree with her in that I won't vote for McCain.

If McCain is the nominee then I'll go third party or write in or I'll just stay home.

But I can't vote for Hillary. It isn't that I believe Hillary will ever get her ridiculous socialist health care implemented or her stupid "it takes a village" bullshit, it is more that I do not want to give those views my stamp of approval by voting for her.


What could YOU possibly have against McCain relative to the other canidates? That guy isn't half bad. And he is a conservative...but not a hardcore conservative. Moderates FTW.

[jabtay]

What could YOU possibly have against McCain relative to the other canidates? That guy isn't half bad. And he is a conservative...but not a hardcore conservative. Moderates FTW.
Uh..no! He is a Social Republican, far from a Conservative. I really dont want him or hillary president, but I will vote for mccain to keep hillary out of the white house.why does it always come down to the lesser of 2 evils?

[blurboEK]

Uh..no! He is a Social Republican, far from a Conservative. I really dont want him or hillary president, but I will vote for mccain to keep hillary out of the white house.why does it always come down to the lesser of 2 evils?

Because unfortunately option 'D: None Of The Above' does not exist in elections..

[Scott]

I think it depends on who McCain is campaigning for. The hard-core conservatives or the moderates. Ann Coulter is a big voice and a lot of people listen to her. For the first time I actually agree with her on something. :lol:


Only Libs and Dems think Republicans listen to Coulter. :lmao:

[oh1coupe]

What could YOU possibly have against McCain relative to the other canidates? That guy isn't half bad. And he is a conservative...but not a hardcore conservative. Moderates FTW.

Moderates FTL ; the country operates on a two party system, in which the two sides fight eachother from different political positions. The closer the two come to agreeance, the closer it comes to a dictatorship w/o checks

[Topless T/A]

Moderates FTL ; the country operates on a two party system, in which the two sides fight eachother from different political positions. The closer the two come to agreeance, the closer it comes to a dictatorship w/o checks

seriously?...isn't the whole entire purpose of government to get people to work together for the greater good? Obviously the dems and repubs do a pile of bickering back and forth, but they both have their good ideas which require them to work together....I mean if you'd rather have both parties sit in opposite corners and accomplish nothing, then I guess there's no point in supporting anyone at all.

[oh1coupe]

seriously?...isn't the whole entire purpose of government to get people to work together for the greater good? Obviously the dems and repubs do a pile of bickering back and forth, but they both have their good ideas which require them to work together....I mean if you'd rather have both parties sit in opposite corners and accomplish nothing, then I guess there's no point in supporting anyone at all.

No, people work together for the greater good, due to capitalism. The federal government is in place to make sure states dont infringe on the peoples rights. The best way to make sure the federal government doesnt become corrupt, is with a two party system, and other checks and ballances, which over the past few decades has started, homogeneously ,fucking the people over.

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

What could YOU possibly have against McCain relative to the other canidates? That guy isn't half bad. And he is a conservative...but not a hardcore conservative. Moderates FTW.

He is not a conservative. Far from it.

The Dems and media love him because he is easily beatable by anything they throw up against him. And even if he could win the Presidency they wouldn't mind because he is one of them.

He might be registered Republican and might speak conservative speak, but he is neither.

[DSG]

seriously?...isn't the whole entire purpose of government to get people to work together for the greater good? Obviously the dems and repubs do a pile of bickering back and forth, but they both have their good ideas which require them to work together....I mean if you'd rather have both parties sit in opposite corners and accomplish nothing, then I guess there's no point in supporting anyone at all.

Uhmmm the Democrats don't have any good ideas.

I'll name a few of there great ideas that work very well.

Social Security
High Taxes
Amnesty
Welfare
Gun control...the DC Hand gun ban works awesome.
Universal Health Care

So pretty much the Deomcrats are socialist.

I see no good ideas from them, hell I can teven name one.

[BAMF]

Uhmmm the Democrats don't have any good ideas.

I'll name a few of there great ideas that work very well.

Social Security
High Taxes
Amnesty
Welfare
Gun control...the DC Hand gun ban works awesome.
Universal Health Care

So pretty much the Deomcrats are socialist.

I see no good ideas from them, hell I can teven name one.

Social Security - Uhh, tell me again how SS is a Democrat program?

High Taxes - Bigger government requires more taxation. It happens. Address the root cause, not the backwoods, inbred redneck rantings cause

Amnesty - Not as widely endorsed as you're led to believe.

Welfare - Uhh, yeah. And? Would you rather have to pay the bottom feeders more to do their jobs? Cuz one way or another, they provide valuable services to society but can't make it on their own. Also, I'm willing to bet a large sum of money that you have NO IDEA how far social welfare goes. I pray you never have to find out first hand jsut how helpful it can be.

Gun control...the DC Hand gun ban works awesome. - Oh, and Republicans have your back on guns, right? check out what Bush said he'd vote on any future gun control legislation. I bet Guliani is incredibly pro-gun, you know...since he's so right wing. Oh, what did he do to New York again? Come on by the gun forum, Jr. We'll learn you who has your back with your 2nd ammendment.

Universal Health Care - With the proper checks and balances and limitations, it is PROVEN, as in, in effect now, to work better than privatized healthcare.


Oh, and THIS COUNTRY is part socialist. Its our ability to have a little bit of both systems that make us so dang good. Get used to it.

In closing, I'm not sure who you are, but you need to get your facts straight.

[BAMF]

He is not a conservative. Far from it.

The Dems and media love him because he is easily beatable by anything they throw up against him. And even if he could win the Presidency they wouldn't mind because he is one of them.

He might be registered Republican and might speak conservative speak, but he is neither.

Well he surely isn't a liberal with soem of his stances. Like I said, moderates FTW! Explains why I don't mind him. The absolute best ideas are here in the middle ground, not on either extremist's wing.

[Topless T/A]

Social Security - Uhh, tell me again how SS is a Democrat program?

High Taxes - Bigger government requires more taxation. It happens. Address the root cause, not the backwoods, inbred redneck rantings cause

Amnesty - Not as widely endorsed as you're led to believe.

Welfare - Uhh, yeah. And? Would you rather have to pay the bottom feeders more to do their jobs? Cuz one way or another, they provide valuable services to society but can't make it on their own.

Gun control...the DC Hand gun ban works awesome. - Oh, and Republicans have your back on guns, right? check out what Bush said he'd vote on any future gun control legislation. I bet Guliani is incredibly pro-gun, you know...since he's so right wing. Oh, what did he do to New York again? Come on by the gun forum, Jr. We'll learn you who has your back with your 2nd ammendment.

Universal Health Care - With the proper checks and balances and limitations, it is PROVEN, as in, in effect now, to work better than privatized healthcare.


In closing, I'm not sure who you are, but you need to get your facts straight.

true story.

[25psi]

Social Security - Uhh, tell me again how SS is a Democrat program?

High Taxes - Bigger government requires more taxation. It happens. Address the root cause, not the backwoods, inbred redneck rantings cause.
Go ahead and raise taxes, then figure out why your not getting any more revenue and you've killed the economy.

Welfare - Uhh, yeah. And? Would you rather have to pay the bottom feeders more to do their jobs? Cuz one way or another, they provide valuable services to society but can't make it on their own. Also, I'm willing to bet a large sum of money that you have NO IDEA how far social welfare goes. I pray you never have to find out first hand jsut how helpful it can be.
I like the "workfare" idea as a nice reform to welfare.

Gun control...the DC Hand gun ban works awesome.
Your joking right?

Universal Health Care - With the proper checks and balances and limitations, it is PROVEN, as in, in effect now, to work better than privatized healthcare. What is you definition of "working better"? Does a health care system work better if it is more accessable yet offers poorer care?


Oh, and THIS COUNTRY is part socialist. Its our ability to have a little bit of both systems that make us so dang good. Get used to it.

Our success has been how we have relatively avoided socialist policy, we have one of the smallest tax burdens of the industrialized nations(although our business taxes are fairly high, and hurt our international competition).

[oh1coupe]

Uhmmm the Democrats don't have any good ideas.

I'll name a few of there great ideas that work very well.

Social Security
High Taxes
Amnesty
Welfare
Gun control...the DC Hand gun ban works awesome.
Universal Health Care

So pretty much the Deomcrats are socialist.

I see no good ideas from them, hell I can teven name one.

nice hi-jack to nowhere:roll:

[BAMF]

Go ahead and raise taxes, then figure out why your not getting any more revenue and you've killed the economy.

I never said I was for high taxes. I dislike the government taking 25% of my paycheck for income taxes.


I like the "workfare" idea as a nice reform to welfare.


Social welfare is more than the Welfare program.


Your joking right?


He said that. Not me. kthxbye


What is you definition of "working better"? Does a health care system work better if it is more accessable yet offers poorer care?


more accessable. Better care. Less expensive. Overall better general health. Australia.



Our success has been how we have relatively avoided socialist policy, we have one of the smallest tax burdens of the industrialized nations(although our business taxes are fairly high, and hurt our international competition).

Okay. Whatever you say. i'm not going back and forth with you about our opinions of just how socialist this country is.

[TampaDude]

McCain is a RINO...I would only vote for him to keep Hillary out of the White House...if it's Obama vs. McCain, I'm voting for Obama...

[DSG]

Social Security - Uhh, tell me again how SS is a Democrat program?

The New Deal was introduced by FDR( A Democrat) and included Social Security. Since when is the Govt responsable for you retireing. If you dont save for it them go fuck yourself.

[/QUOTE]High Taxes - Bigger government requires more taxation. It happens. Address the root cause, not the backwoods, inbred redneck rantings cause[/QUOTE]

I agree with this statement but the Dems want to increase the size of Govt by adding things like Unaversal Health Care. The core base of the Dems think the Govt knows better when it comes to you living your life. BTW the largest employer in the world in the US Govt. Our fore fathers would be very happy with us wouldnt they?

[/QUOTE]Amnesty - Not as widely endorsed as you're led to believe.[/QUOTE]
Yes but if it were not for the Republicans in the House and Senate there would have been an amnesty bill that passed last year. Glad it didnt.


[/QUOTE]Welfare - Uhh, yeah. And? Would you rather have to pay the bottom feeders more to do their jobs? Cuz one way or another, they provide valuable services to society but can't make it on their own. Also, I'm willing to bet a large sum of money that you have NO IDEA how far social welfare goes. I pray you never have to find out first hand jsut how helpful it can be.[/QUOTE]
Fuck the bottom feeders. Get a fucking job and stop being a leach on society. I dont give two rat shits about anyone who doesnt care enough to care for themsleves. The Govt is not suppose to support the people its vice vesra.


[/QUOTE]Gun control...the DC Hand gun ban works awesome. - Oh, and Republicans have your back on guns, right? check out what Bush said he'd vote on any future gun control legislation. I bet Guliani is incredibly pro-gun, you know...since he's so right wing. Oh, what did he do to New York again? Come on by the gun forum, Jr. We'll learn you who has your back with your 2nd ammendment.[/QUOTE]Guliani is not right wing and last I looked he was no longer in the race, so go pound sand on that arguement. And dont call me JR.

[/QUOTE]Universal Health Care - With the proper checks and balances and limitations, it is PROVEN, as in, in effect now, to work better than privatized healthcare.[/QUOTE] Proven by who? The Canadian system works so well that they are having to send there citizens to America to deliver babies cause they cannot handle the flow. Also citizens of Canada are comming to America to have surjury cause the Dr. in Canada suck. and I like having 50% taxes to have to pay for it. Nothing like working till June so I can start to keep some of my hard earned money.


[/QUOTE]Oh, and THIS COUNTRY is part socialist. Its our ability to have a little bit of both systems that make us so dang good. Get used to it.[/QUOTE]This is a completely incorrect statment. The US Govt is a representative republic. Look up the definition. This conty is not socialist but is is headed that way and thats not the way it needs to head in order to stay the greatest nation in the world.

In closing, I'm not sure who you are, but you need to get your facts straight.[/QUOTE]

As for your facts. Pot this is the kettle over.

[BAMF]

The New Deal was introduced by FDR( A Democrat) and included Social Security. Since when is the Govt responsable for you retireing. If you dont save for it them go fuck yourself.

Even if you're doing great, if enough other people are doing horribly you're not going to be doing well for long. Thats a common mistake people completely against government assistance make. They think that as long as they keep their money and succeed, their lives will be peachy. Well guess what, you don't hold the economy together. Everyone does. So everyone needs to be taken care of just a little bit.


I agree with this statement but the Dems want to increase the size of Govt by adding things like Unaversal Health Care. The core base of the Dems think the Govt knows better when it comes to you living your life. BTW the largest employer in the world in the US Govt. Our fore fathers would be very happy with us wouldnt they?


And the Republicans want to increase the size of the government with things like the Patriot Act, Dept of Homeland Security, you get the idea....

Amnesty - Not as widely endorsed as you're led to believe.
Yes but if it were not for the Republicans in the House and Senate there would have been an amnesty bill that passed last year. Glad it didnt.

Amnesty means more peopel to pay taxes. Remember that?


Fuck the bottom feeders. Get a fucking job and stop being a leach on society. I dont give two rat shits about anyone who doesnt care enough to care for themsleves. The Govt is not suppose to support the people its vice vesra.


Like I said. I hope you are never absolutely down on your luck at rock bottom and have to find out just how necessary and helpful the government is. I also hate leechers, but there ARE people utilizing government social welfare services out there who just need a hand and will soon return to beign productive members of society...and while we're on teh subject, I state again your statement doesn't begin to address the scope of social welfare programs and how far beyond Welfare checks they go and how much good they do.

Guliani is not right wing and last I looked he was no longer in the race, so go pound sand on that arguement. And dont call me JR fuckface.


Then don't EVER try to talk to me about gun related subjects again, Jr. I forget more in a week about gun laws then you know. Gaurenteed.

Proven by who? The Canadian system works so well that they are having to send there citizens to America to deliver babies cause they cannot handle the flow. Also citizens of Canada are comming to America to have surjury cause the Dr. in Canada suck. and I like having 50% taxes to have to pay for it. Nothing like working till June so I can start to keep some of my hard earned money.


Australia. And I've illustrated numerous times what my plan is and exactly how it woudl save money and increase the general level of health. And guess what? Not one of these political windbags on this site has ever punched a hole in it. Its airtight. Because its already in use in places like Australia. And it works very well. So I'm not even gonna bother repeating it for you. Search for it. Or study the Roo's healthcare.

This is a completely incorrect statment. The US Govt is a representative republic. Look up the definition. This conty is not socialist but is is headed that way and thats not the way it needs to head in order to stay the greatest nation in the world.


The government provides public goods because they are more effecient at it than the private sector. This is because public goods hold no profit incentive and the private secotr will not produce a good if they can't make money off of it. That is a socialist aspect of our country. All I had to do was name ONE example, like I just did, and your statement is thwarted. Go back to Econ 101.


In closing, I'm not sure who you are, but you need to get your facts straight.

I'm the guy who is giving you a political bitchslap. Get used to it, you're gonna become this board's whipping boy with that lack of knowledge and attitude.

[Billy]

Nick, calm down. This is supposed to be a place for good natured debate. I don't want to see it drop to the level of name calling, etc...

Same for you Dave, and it's nice to see you back and posting on the site(s).

[SilentBob86]

The Govt is not suppose to support the people its vice vesra.

And you are so very horribly, ridiculously wrong its not even funny. Go read the constitution there chief, you may just be surprised! The govt is def here to support and take care of the country and its citizens....not the opposite way around :nono:

[DSG]

And you are so very horribly, ridiculously wrong its not even funny. Go read the constitution there chief, you may just be surprised! The govt is def here to support and take care of the country and its citizens....not the opposite way around :nono:

Not when it comes to a paycheck. The Govt should be here only when it comes to enforcing the laws and protecting us from enemies abroad. The govt was not set up so hood rats can have 87 babies and get a check on the 1st and the 15th. The govt was not and is not set up to support the poor. So you re-read the Constitution chief. This is yet one more reason we are going bankrupt as a country. We cannot just keep printing money out of thin air to support everyone.

And Bamf, I disagree with all your points. Political bitch slap...Please. Don't flatter yourself. You are just another Neosocialist/communist that subscribes to moveon.org. So Keep patting yourself on the back.

[DSG]

Same for you Dave, and it's nice to see you back and posting on the site(s).

Billy, I guess its good to be back. I may not stick around long with the company tou guys keep. I am very suprised to the level of liberalism that hangs around here. Guess thats the way the youngsters are today.

[oh1coupe]

Billy, I guess its good to be back. I may not stick around long with the company tou guys keep. I am very suprised to the level of liberalism that hangs around here. Guess thats the way the youngsters are today.

common man thats what makes it fun`

[SilentBob86]

Not when it comes to a paycheck. The Govt should be here only when it comes to enforcing the laws and protecting us from enemies abroad. The govt was not set up so hood rats can have 87 babies and get a check on the 1st and the 15th. The govt was not and is not set up to support the poor. So you re-read the Constitution chief. This is yet one more reason we are going bankrupt as a country. We cannot just keep printing money out of thin air to support everyone.

And Bamf, I disagree with all your points. Political bitch slap...Please. Don't flatter yourself. You are just another Neosocialist/communist that subscribes to moveon.org. So Keep patting yourself on the back.

Ok, i see what your saying and agree. Sorry, i mistook what you said :lol:. And i def dont think the gov should literaly pay our bills or anything. Im all for smaller govt and less spending.And yes, im a RP nutswinger i guess.

[Nikon]

Social Programs

So instead of all this bantering, would someone like to give an example of what our country would look like without all of our social programs? Not every one on a social program is a bottom feeder. It's NOT a black and white issue.

For example, couple has a child, one of the parent's books it. They just walked out on someone they are legally responsible for until they are 18 years old. Thus introduces child support. It's supposed to take a fair percentage of income from the irresponsible parent to ensure the goodwill of the child by assisting the single parent. (I agree that this percentage is unfair in some circumstances, but thats for another thread).

Nothing we pay in taxes goes into the above scenario at all, except for the litigation under the judicial branch to get the child support started.

Now take a similar scenario where a parent dies 5 years into the child's life. Thats another 13 years the widowed parent has left to do everything on their own. If they're not making a ton of money already, then they're going to have a hard time trying to do anything financially. They'll probably not put anything aside for their own retirement until the child is on it's own or is capable of holding a job (most states allow employement of minors anywhere between 14 and 16). Social Security provides the deceased parent's benefits, into the name of the guardian, until the child reaches 18 (regardless of widowed parent's earnings). Most couples have kids anywhere between 20 and 30, where there really isn't much time, effort, or money put into retirement, nor are most people in a position where they'd be able to survive this kind of event.

Imagine what kinds of things could go wrong without the support of the social security. You can say, "well the parent should do better by getting a better job" all you want, but not all scenarios are black and white. If the mother is an administrative assistant and wants to move up to make more money, most people won't be taken seriously unless they hold a degree, but then you have the issue of maintaining a home, providing meals, taking care of the child, AND going to school (and paying for it) all by themselves.

This may have been easier years ago, but if you haven't noticed, the price everything has also shot up a shitload in the past 8 years too. Social programs have a place in our society, whether you use them or not. It keeps people off the streets and alive.

I agree there are leaches in our system that bring it down, but getting rid of the programs itself doesn't solve anything. True, honest Americans, also use these programs. Not all of the people who utilize them are bottom feeders.

How do I get rid of these bottom feeders? I don't know. I don't know what the requirements are for these programs, nor what the government uses for 'red flags' in determining people that are abusing the system. This is what should be looked at though. Not the bottom line of our national budget to save you $200/year on your income tax.

Taxes

If the top 1% of our nation's highest earners make up 40% of our nation's revenue, imagine what even YOUR taxes would be like if they were all of a sudden 'flattened'.

Healthcare

I'm in favor of a national healthcare, but being that we are in a capitalist nation, it's not going to do us any good. Too many people put greed ahead the wellbeing of our people. It's not going to work - at this time. Maybe in the future, but we'll have to see.

Hillary's system doesn't replace your Blue Cross/Blue Shield coverage with Medicare. If anything, it gives you MORE coverage. You won't be rejected for having a pre-existing condition. If you die and you have dependants under your coverage, they'll still be covered. The insurance company cannot cancel or deny you coverage because the plan's signer has passed away. Someone else will have to pay the premiums, but it'll keep you from having to switch coverage where you'd have to go through a screening process again with another insurer. Insurance companies won't be able to price you out of the plan, as it places a cap on the amount an insurer can charge based on a percentage of income your household brings home.

If you'd rather go by the industry's rules and backstabbing tactics, to shed themselves of all risk possible, when the company exists for the shear purpose of 'what if', then go ahead and be stubborn.

No, I'm not voting for Hillary. Truthfully haven't made up my mind yet. But it would be good for some of you to at least read the plans instead of spreading around information spoon fed to you by the opponents.

[jabtay]

Billy, I guess its good to be back. I may not stick around long with the company tou guys keep. I am very suprised to the level of liberalism that hangs around here. Guess thats the way the youngsters are today.
Awwe man, you gotta stick around. there are far more fish to fry on this board :naughty:

[BAMF]

Nick, calm down. This is supposed to be a place for good natured debate. I don't want to see it drop to the level of name calling, etc...

Same for you Dave, and it's nice to see you back and posting on the site(s).

Sorry, Billy - I'll chill out. Its been a long while since I've gotten good and heated about a political debate. Damn work and whatnot has kept me away. :lol:

[jabtay]

whatnot
I hate that word :( sounds so backwoods redneck

[BAMF]

I hate that word :( sounds so backwoods redneck

Have you SEEN my TF gallery? :lol:

[jabtay]

touche :lmao:

[Tripw0l]

something is fundamentally wrong with the universe if I'm agreeing with Ann Coulter about anything....

[25psi]

Taxes

If the top 1% of our nation's highest earners make up 40% of our nation's revenue, imagine what even YOUR taxes would be like if they were all of a sudden 'flattened'.

The rich are always going to pay more in taxes, even under a regressive system. I would support a Flat Tax or the FairTax....everyone should be paying the same percentage.



I'm in favor of a national healthcare, but being that we are in a capitalist nation, it's not going to do us any good. Too many people put greed ahead the wellbeing of our people. It's not going to work - at this time. Maybe in the future, but we'll have to see.
"Greed" is why market economies work in the first place. Greed is human nature, not an American Phenomenon. Healthcare is something that you will end up paying for whether it is in taxes or your health insurance.

[oh1coupe]

Fuck this forum.