Somebody explain this bush-ism please. How can any intelligent human being who, at the same time, realizes that this war will cost at least 70 billion dollars, and then turn around and lecture everybody about a taxcut? And not one taxcut, but several. Where is the logic, Bush? Where is the logic? Furthermore, how do taxcuts "stimulate" the economy? How exactly does this work? Having a hard time answering those illogical questions?
Bush is on the same level as Saddam. Both want to control the world. Both kill their people (and I am NOT talking about war casualities). It just makes me sick how people can sit back and swallow his fucking lies and then have the nerve to lecture me.
Bush is on the same level as Saddam. Both want to control the world. Both kill their people (and I am NOT talking about war casualities). It just makes me sick how people can sit back and swallow his fucking lies and then have the nerve to lecture me.
Tax cuts are not funding a war. They ARE for the economy! (But it appears you were to focused on the word ìStimulateî to hear how that happensÖ
ReplyDeleteThe additional cuts are for the people who are complaining about the cuts only being for the rich!! Nothing more
This isnÃt even the case here, as the first round of cuts were for the middle and lower class too. Just in too much of an indirect way for most to understand. The first large cuts were for the SUPER RICH, the corporations. Corporate spending ëstimulatesà (stay with me) the economy by creating new jobs for new projects or to support new equipment that also helps another company increase their workforce to keep up with the higher demand from, thatÃs right, the Corporate SpendingÖ Are ya getting the picture now?!? (Sort of like the snow settling in one of those snow scene-globesÖ)
This war is an attempt, for a means to and end. Which is more than anyone else has done besides make policies that make themselves rich off of the suffering and blood of others. (ThatÃs right, just like the rest of the worldÖ) Although Clinton acknowledged WMDs and an extremely volatile regime he was not willing to do anymore than lob a few bombs during a very suspect period.
Your comment:
ìIraq hasn't had any since the last gulf war...or at least the last bombing by the US?î
Are You Serious??? You really believe that those bombs hit anything of significance?!?
Have you learned nothing from watching the events of this war unfold?
Now, the Left had nothing to say then, nothing to say when people die but are instead more concerned about lab rats and studying the habits of trans-sexual, bi-spiritual Indians (thatÃs right, take a look at what the Dems are supporting) And of course, creating new taxes!
WMDs were a support building mechanism because the government knows that there are way too many people out there that need to be on a band-wagon to get behind anything.
If Clinton was still president, dems would have nothing to say!!
THIS IS ABOUT TERRORISM THATÃS IT! (I know I know, thereÃs no link to Al-Qeada) Did I mention it seems that that the Left has no common sense?
Bottom line:
It is common knowledge that SadamÃs Regime supported the families of any Palestinian who dies in the fight against the ëinfidelsà (with about 15,000 US) and any Suicide Bomber would get about 25,000. Now over there, thatÃs more money than these guys are ever going to make! Death, in return for your familyÃs welfare.
Only a tyrant would dangle such a temptation.
Bill and Hillary are playing games already, denouncing things said by fellow Dems to clear the way for Hillary in 08Ã.
Post this or not, IÃll never be back..
But cool site none the less. (Even if I donÃt agree with your views J)
Sincerely,
The Mid-Right