PDA

View Full Version : Enough!




Sarge
11-30-2009, 04:27 PM
If they want to send more to war and a war tax here it is.

Send all the brokerage sons to war and let them pay. They have reaped and raped the wealth now let them pay. GS, AIG, CITY, JPM, CHASE. UBS you name them. All those who want war after war can send their sons and see if they want to continue this BS for who?

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20091130/D9CA33PG0.html

ENOUGH!!!!

CasualApathy
11-30-2009, 05:07 PM
well...

The hypothetical son of a big CEO can not really be blamed for the actions of his dad... Seems unfair to him to punish him for that.

Uriel999
11-30-2009, 05:10 PM
well...

The hypothetical son of a big CEO can not really be blamed for the actions of his dad... Seems unfair to him to punish him for that.

I agree...send the damned CEO's!

Grimnir Wotansvolk
11-30-2009, 05:15 PM
Not only that, pick up every soccer mom with a yellow ribbon or "proud parent of a U.S. marine" bumper sticker and ship them over. They'll be our frontline troops.

Austin
11-30-2009, 05:15 PM
I'd rather see the folks that vote to continue funding pay the cost, rather than some disconnected group....

Uriel999
11-30-2009, 06:15 PM
I'd rather see the folks that vote to continue funding pay the cost, rather than some disconnected group....

Them too! See we are building up quite the army of assholes arn't we!

TCE
11-30-2009, 08:45 PM
I would be for a Constitutional Amendment that states something like the following:

"Anytime a tax increase is passed, all members of Congress and the President of the United States will receive a salary of $1.00 for that fiscal year."

That way, they are punishing themselves while punishing us.

cheapseats
11-30-2009, 08:54 PM
well...

The hypothetical son of a big CEO can not really be blamed for the actions of his dad... Seems unfair to him to punish him for that.

Well...

It rather depends on one's Beliefs, doesn't it?

The Bible holds that the sins of the fathers will be visited upon their sons. If there are professed Christians among the Bloodthirsty, I should think this would give them pause. But that is mere logic, applied to the Bible Thumping model.

ghengis86
11-30-2009, 09:09 PM
Well...

It rather depends on one's Beliefs, doesn't it?

The Bible holds that the sins of the fathers will be visited upon their sons. If there are professed Christians among the Bloodthirsty, I should think this would give them pause. But that is mere logic, applied to the Bible Thumping model.

not exactly:
http://www.wineintro.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=339249

Brian4Liberty
11-30-2009, 09:14 PM
If they want to send more to war and a war tax here it is.

Send all the brokerage sons to war and let them pay. They have reaped and raped the wealth now let them pay. GS, AIG, CITY, JPM, CHASE. UBS you name them. All those who want war after war can send their sons and see if they want to continue this BS for who?

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20091130/D9CA33PG0.html

ENOUGH!!!!

Did you listen to Michael Savage today? He was kind of on this train of thought. He actually said he wants to send Hannity and Limbaugh into the front combat lines in Afghanistan. Too bad he didn't send himself to Iraq when he was war-mongering... :rolleyes:

Lovecraftian4Paul
11-30-2009, 09:17 PM
If they get this tax through, it needs to be thrown into the faces of the neo-cons as proof that their entanglements only end in bigger government and more taxation.

Brian4Liberty
11-30-2009, 09:18 PM
well...

The hypothetical son of a big CEO can not really be blamed for the actions of his dad... Seems unfair to him to punish him for that.

You would be punishing the father, as well as the son...

Not that this is really punishment for most men of power. Sending the sons to make a name for themselves in the military is a long standing tradition. It's just within the last generation or so that we have been the victims of the chicken hawks in leadership positions.

Dianne
11-30-2009, 10:47 PM
I agree...send the damned CEO's!

And send Barry Seotoro, who whatever the heck Obama's real name is. The audacity of a commander and chief, who has not spent 10 seconds in the armed forces himself, to send thousands more to die for corporate greed... grrrrrrrrrrrrr... Parachute Obama's ass to Afghanistan since he is so ready, willing and able to continue this farce.

ScoutsHonor
12-01-2009, 06:53 AM
Did you listen to Michael Savage today? He was kind of on this train of thought. He actually said he wants to send Hannity and Limbaugh into the front combat lines in Afghanistan. Too bad he didn't send himself to Iraq when he was war-mongering... :rolleyes:
I heard him, and was amazed. WHEN did he stop loving the war, or is he just agin' it because Obama's for it?

Enquiring minds want to know...

Todd
12-01-2009, 11:11 AM
Bump for being pissed at the sheer arrogance


The escalation, which would take place over the next year, would put more than 100,000 American troops in Afghanistan at an annual cost of about $75 billion.

Obama is also expected to outline an exit strategy for the war.

Democrats concerned over the price tag have proposed a war tax to pay for operations. Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, has introduced legislation to impose a war surtax beginning in 2011. The bill would exempt service members and their families.


Let this guy know how you feel.

jmdrake
12-01-2009, 11:20 AM
Did you listen to Michael Savage today? He was kind of on this train of thought. He actually said he wants to send Hannity and Limbaugh into the front combat lines in Afghanistan. Too bad he didn't send himself to Iraq when he was war-mongering... :rolleyes:

I've heard Savage turning against the Afghan war. As you said he supported the war in Iraq. He still sort of supports it with his strange "Iraq should pay us reparations for liberating them" demand. I guess his argument against Afghanistan is that they don't have the oil to pay us back? (They do have that gas pipeline project). We do need to look at ways of using people like Savage (and Beck) to our advantage without being co-opted.

Uncle Emanuel Watkins
12-01-2009, 11:45 AM
If they want to send more to war and a war tax here it is.

Send all the brokerage sons to war and let them pay. They have reaped and raped the wealth now let them pay. GS, AIG, CITY, JPM, CHASE. UBS you name them. All those who want war after war can send their sons and see if they want to continue this BS for who?

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20091130/D9CA33PG0.html

ENOUGH!!!!

1. People will behave responsible because it makes him or her happy to be so. 2. No person will behave responsibly for the sake of behaving so. 3. It is the natural tendency of tyranny to neglect the happiness or the people they rule over for the sake of some responsible cause. 4. People go to war when they are unhappy. 5. If the people remain unhappy in the foreign war tyranny involves them with, then they go to civil war with the tyranny ruling over them.

ScoutsHonor
12-01-2009, 12:19 PM
I've heard Savage turning against the Afghan war. As you said he supported the war in Iraq. He still sort of supports it with his strange "Iraq should pay us reparations for liberating them" demand. I guess his argument against Afghanistan is that they don't have the oil to pay us back? (They do have that gas pipeline project). We do need to look at ways of using people like Savage (and Beck) to our advantage without being co-opted.

His argument is sound enough, that 1) war KILLS men, thus is (needlessly) killing American soldiers, and 2) he says he doesn't understand why we're in Afghanistan at all...(No wonder, & neither do I!!)

It's an ethical argument that I like very much; just not sure that the truth isn't that he's simply following the party line....:( :rolleyes:

.

Brian4Liberty
12-01-2009, 03:19 PM
His argument is sound enough, that 1) war KILLS men, thus is (needlessly) killing American soldiers, and 2) he says he doesn't understand why we're in Afghanistan at all...(No wonder, & neither do I!!)

It's an ethical argument that I like very much; just not sure that the truth isn't that he's simply following the party line....:( :rolleyes:

.

Savage was adamantly against the undeclared war on Serbia. He is more moderate on war then most right-wing war-mongers. Like many people, he only wants war when someone threatens his country(s) or people. He believes that Iran, Iraq, etc. fit in that category, thus he is for those wars.