Is spellcheck really that hard? Just reading your posts continues to be headache-inducing.
I pointed out the false numbers you used back then, because, wait for it, you used false numbers. You stated then that you were using my numbers, but you weren't. Check 'em back and read them slowly. You posted and agreed with the same false data that kyrider used, as it came from the same small-brained blog which bungled the math.
You've said the 3% surtax proposal didn't exist, and railed against people by calling it fictional, yet when pointed to the Senate proposal, you change your mind to saying anything proposed in the Senate doesn't exist because it won't pass.
You can stand here all day long and rail on "I don't like this, and I wish we spent less, and I wish the government was smaller, and I wish wishes were puppies", and it would be all good. What is terribly tedious is that while your posts are littered with bad data ostensibly supporting your misguided views, the prior post is the first in 600 posts in this thread where you finally admitted that your facts aren't exactly that, on even the most minor of details, until you get called on them several posts in row and you actually read (and check the dates) on the sources you copy from.
Disagreeing with your premise, your "facts", and your delivery isn't a diversion, it's just pointing out the obvious to anyone who you haven't already driven from this area.
|