Its ok revstriker, I can take a little childish namecalling. I dont mind him playing teacher and correcting the spelling mistakes in my posts. None of it takes away from the content that he and others choose to ignore. All while being led down the primrose path by the democrat party. The
fact that 43 democrats in the senate and 139 democrats in the house voted for the bush tax cuts to remain in H.R. 4853 is not disputed.
We got the "its the republicans fault" and the fact that they could "filibuster" any legislation line. As if somehow, that explains why the vote was
very lopsided in favor of the very tax cuts that are now opposed by the democrats.
Interestingly enough I did get a couple senate proposals out of him, proposals that were submitted
after the democrats lost the house in historic fashion and have no chance of getting anywhere. Thats why I dont talk about proposals. I like to talk about
real bills. The fact that the senate proposed a tax increase means nothing. Its merely grandstanding and positioning for the masses and democrat ideology.
If the democrats
really wanted tax increases why didnt they propose them when they had all 3 branches? They did in fact have a filibuster proof majority (for quite some time) that could have rammed them home. It didnt happen. Why??? They are only interested in
talking about tax increases to further the class warfare montra. Its all a smokescreen as stated before.
The democrats have a plan of attack .... Talk about "taxing the rich" but not about spending.
There is plenty of ammo out there to fire at the republicans when it comes to the spending argument. The lord knows speaker Boner is indeed a spender and is in no way conservative. So why dont we talk about spending?
Ill tell you why...As you know (revstriker) the democrats record on spending is abysmal at best. Yes..... abysmal - 1. of or like an abyss ; immeasurably deep or great. 2. extremely or hopelessly bad or severe.
So at all costs and by any means necessary divert the conversation.
I have talked about it in this very thread, I used a credible source (according to alex) for my numbers, I used numbers posted by Alex himself. You know what I got as a response?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex
You post incorrect numbers for spending. You mistake yearly deficit spending for overall deficit. You underquote the spending done for the prior 8 years.
|
And then shortly thereafter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex
I won't be involved in any political discussions on this site anymore, other than to step in when people are breaking the T.O.S. Calling someone who disagrees with you racist (as has already been done in this thread, but not by you) is mighty close to that line if anyone had reported it to me.
|
Now fast forward to post # 608
Alex is indeed in a political conversation and hes calling someone who disagrees with him a dolt, sack of illiterate dogmeat, illiterate hick, bubkis, and a tired, useless hack.
A T.O.S. violation, IDK? Does it matter? Who is there to report it too?
Its hard to accept the fact that you are wrong. Its even harder to admit it.
I have come to accept the fact that Alex wont admit he was wrong. Its all good.
Hes a cherry picker and the very same thing he accused me of being. A hack. Hes just like the rest of the democrats although he is a little better at holding his tounge, up until post #608
Diversion is his game when the facts dont line up with the party line. Ill talk about X when the subject is Y. Then Ill call the original poster names and correct his grammer and spelling to make it look like hes wrong. Something that used to be frowned upon here.
None of it takes away from the true argument, but it sure is entertaining.
Im well aware that there is no way you will
ever get a democrat to admit that their party is wrong. They are so engrained in the ideology that it becomes blinding. Class warefare is indeed the democrat ideology because its the only way back to the white house for obama. He cant talk about his record, (abysmal) he cant talk about obamacare. (wildly unpopular) Whats does that leave for the democrats to run on??