I agree with you that there's a lot more going on in the 90's and the 20 aughts that a graph focused solely on tax rates wouldn't be able to adequately address. If 9/11 hadn't happened, if we hadn't invaded Iraq, if the SEC had done their jobs, etc. Not saying that I love GOP policy priorities, but it's important to look at the overall picture as much as possible, and not just the facts that are politically expedient. Context matters, even if we don't like it.

Weren't there a couple of terrorist attacks early in Clinton's tenure?

Context does not matter, like it or not.

Republicans lie for votes so they can rob the treasury.

That's all they do and all they will ever do. Period.

Bush could have dealt with the deficit the wars produced. But instead of a war tax to attempt to offset costs, we had large tax cuts along with a huge amount of new non war-related spending.

Wars can be paid for with war bonds. Then the government has to sell the war. Read Flags of Our Fathers that tells of the Iwo Jima photo being used for war bond sales drives. War bonds were not used for Iraq war so spending could be kept a secret since war profits were the whole point of the war. FDR in WWII raised income taxes specifically to target war profiteers. Today, war profiteering is the goal. Nothing matters to a Republican besides robbing the treasury. Debt is easily blamed on someone else, just fob it off, why not. Then watch spineless Democrats suck it up.

@TheAubs: I don't think you can divorce the events you're talking about from GOP policy priorities, though. If the Bush Administration hadn't pettily decided to focus on the opposite of what the Clinton Administration told them was important, maybe they could have prevented 9/11. Of course invading Iraq was entirely their choice, and not something that just happened. And when you have an anti-regulation administration, you can expect regulators to do a bad job. Context doesn't exactly let the GOP off the hook -- if anything, it makes them more blameworthy.

Wait a second, wasn't there an massive internet boom created in the 90's that ballooned up and popped in early January 2000? Is she implying that Clinton invented the internet with Gore or that the internet had nothing to do with economic growth in the 2000's?

Correlation does not imply causation

Unless, of course, it's the disasterous economy handed off to Obama. In that case it's all Obama's fault. At least that's what the con bots like to sell as a talking point. Oh yeah, along with the TARP and the AIG deal, which Obama has somehow been given 'credit' for, in spite of the fact those things were done before the election was held.

Aside from that, yes, Clinton was an extremely lucky president. He had the internet boom, then was out of office when that bubble popped. Of course he and Gore did push the 'information superhighway' pretty hard, which maybe offered some help to the internet's spurt of growth? No, it didn't 'invent' it (which was not what Gore said, BTW), but it sure didn't hurt it either.

"Wasn't there an massive internet boom created in the 90's that ballooned up and popped in early January 2000?" No. The tech stock bubble was not "massive".

"Clinton invented the internet with Gore" Ha ha what a clown.

"The internet had nothing to do with economic growth in the 2000's?" Look it up.

Ignorance is bliss

The graphs represent debt without regard to any specific event or policy and properly represent the facts. Bush doesn't get a pass because of 9/11. He created the debt by his policies, tax cuts and wars, and not all of the debt is related to security spending for 9/11. He had 8 years with a rising debt and that is all his own creation.

"Clinton was an extremely lucky president. He had the internet boom" and no one else. Of course computers put many thousands out of work. It's easy to forget that part. And don't forget there are always economic benefits and drags. Reagan's economy benefited from introduction of computers and low gas price and STILL managed to rack up huge deficits with tax cuts for rich in spite of swiping Social Security surplus.

It is not necessary to look further than tax cuts for the rich to see cause of collapsing economy. Tax cuts for rich include unfunded wars and benefits such as Medicare D which should have been paid for with tax hikes instead of debt and stuffing Social Security "lockbox" with IOUs.

Covah, look at the Dow and NASDAQ in 1990, 1999, and 2000 and tell me there wasn't a bubble.

Did someone just suggest the Tech Stock bubble was not massive? Then could you add in the spending on the Y2K issue?

I am also starting to feel a shift in the voice from the Bush Tax Cuts for the Rich to the more aptly named, Bush Tax Cuts. Many people in the US payt no taxes, or very little. The Bush tax cuts (for everyone) eliminated or reduced them. Looking at this, and many other commonly based discussions, I wonder if they aren't now looking at eliminating the Bush tax cuts? They will most likely await the aftermath of the 2012 elections to do it, but I do believe it is on the way.

Wait a second, wasn't there an massive internet boom created in the 90's that ballooned up and popped in early January 2000

Yes. Clinton did not create jobs; neither did Bush. During Clinton's administration there was an economic boom in the internet industry that burst right when Bush became president. After Bush became president his policies created a financial and real estate boom that burst when Obama came into office. Neither Clinton or Bush created jobs.

Many people in the US payt no taxes, or very little

Wrong. Every American pays taxes. What you are confusing here is income tax as being the only form of taxation. There are other means by which people pay taxes. Every American (and illegal or VISA American) pays a tax. They just don't all pay it in the form of income tax. You are also negating the fact that the study to report this information only reported 42% of Americans pay no income tax (which is not the majority). You are additionally negating the fact that there is something called a receassion and that nearly 20% of our workforce is either unemployed or employed, but not currently making enough to pay taxes. Your "factual" statement is completely disingenuous.

FTR I'm not saying this to be an ass; I believe in factual accuracy. Most Americans would pay income taxes if they had a job that paid them enough to. To imply otherwise is being disingenuous to the problem at hand. To imply that no one pays taxes aside from those who pay income taxes is also disingenuous. I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing w/ your larger point- just correcting what I see as factual inaccuracies.

Thanks for the correction, I did say most and I was wrong. Many, almost half don't pay federal income taxes.

REALLY, it's Fox News -- and they LIE ALL THE TIME!!! So, before you start pointing your sarcastic finger at anyone---you need to first, learn how to spell and second check your facts!

Er, I think you need to read cujo's post again JANIE. He was being sarcastic, and btw, Faux means false or fake, and it's a play on words to use Faux rather than Fox.

fix noise was a favorite of mine, but i like faux news too. that they want to run a network like they do doesn't bother me as much as the fact that there is a market for what they spew.

A real American wouldn't comprehend a fox/faux pun, let alone make one.

My favorite is ClusterFox, but I also like Faux and Fixed 'News'.

Most of the GOP platform is pleasant sounding myths. They angrily say"We are against Socialism". Well get rid of social security and medicare and you will have homeless senior citizens dying in the streets. If the GOP got the reult of their myths it would be a very ugly America we would live in. Small Government; thats a good one. Have you GOP folks forgotten how huge our military is? To have a small government we would need to cut the military by 95% at least or the Government of which the military is a part would still be huge.

We're already spending our way out of social security. You don't really think you're going to get to collect it do you? The fed just started raiding federal retiree pensions today. It looks like spending, spending, spending doesn't work either...

"It looks like spending, spending, spending doesn't work either... spending on tax cuts for the rich."

There, fixed it for you.

Tax cuts for the rich is a give-away social entitlement spending experiment that doesn't work.

Taking less isn't giving anything.

Mayby Janie is referencing the fact that the pronunciation of faux is fo and only illiterate people think it is pronounce fox. Oops, sorry MSNBC faithful...

"Taking less isn't giving anything."

That's right, government benefits should be free just because you say so.

Try walking out of the store with a sack of groceries and when you are arrested for shoplifting try those nonsense right-wing excuses about "confiscation of wealth" and "it's my money" and tell the store to "cut spending" on these working people so YOU can get the groceries for free or how the store should borrow money to pay for the groceries just because you don't feel like paying for them.

Interesting analogy, government as grocery store - using this analogy, I think the ultimate republican idea is that the grocery store should close, all the employees should go get jobs somewhere else (so as not to increase the unemployment numbers) and all the customers should grow their own.

Read my lips Covah, I don't want government hand outs. I just want them to do the minimum necessary and I'd gladly pay for that.

"I just want them to do the minimum necessary and I'd gladly pay for that."

The minimum necessary is nothing at all and what you pay is zero. There is no "minimum necessary" in the winger mind.

cut taxes=cut ALL taxes

cut spending=cut ALL spending

Reagan cut taxes and Bush cut taxes and now Ryan want to cut taxes to 25%. They want to eliminate ALL taxes and ALL spending.

They want fascist revolution to overthrow the Constitution and reinstate the aristocratic system of noblesse oblige.

Even Boles/Simpson wanted dramatic tax cuts for the rich.

Why don't those winger fools go to Somalia and be pirates.

No handouts? Then no tax cuts. Tax cuts and subsidies are the rich man's hand out and there is far more money involved in those. Your patriotism is an inspiration to us all.

Covah, prove all that you said.

Don, what about your tax cuts? Feel free to pay those back to the government.

Go to China, Mexico, India, Vietnam, Thailand, Brazil, some other third world hell where you can live like a king. You ain't prepared to pull your weight then you don't deserve to be an American.

My sincere apologies to all the sons of bitches out there.

That's what I get for arguing with a Fox programed A.I. There are no free luches, or shouldn't be...no matter how rich you are.

"I just want them to do the minimum necessary and I'd gladly pay for that."

"Covah, prove all that you said."

Tell me what "minimum' there is because there is NONE.

Evidence? The Laffer Curve is widely purported to show lower taxes increases government revenue when it does no such thing. The Laffer Curve only suggests there is an optimal rate at which taxes return the most revenue. It does not predict what that rate is. Evidence shows that taxes are too low. Taxes are insufficient to support benefits so the benefits shrink and the economy shrinks and investment wealth shrinks more than the tax cuts save.

So show me a Republican who uses the Laffer Curve to advocate boosting taxes and I'll eat my hat.

Everyone knows only rich people deserve nanny-state bottles.

Everyone knows only rich people work hard.

Covah, remember what Pat Buchanan said: rich people deserve more money than poor folks, because they know how to spend it more wisely. After all, it's a hell of a lot smarter to spend your money on yachts, mansions, summer homes, trips around the world, caviar, luxury cars and expensive clothes and jewelry than to waste it on a mortgage, food, health insurance, utilities, and gas for your 10 year old car.

Don, I pay more taxes than you do. When are you going to pull your weight?

Or are you going to continue to wear that bib sucking on the nanny state bottle? Do I see baby tears? Don't worry, I'll pay your way. You're welcome for supporting you while I work hard. Just know that your lively hood depends on my hard work. How does it feel to know that you can't support yourself without my hard work?

The only thing I've taken from the govt is my tax refund. If the top two percent actually earned their tax cuts and produced jobs here in America then we would have neither the unemployment numbers we do or the deficit we have if manufacturing was done here in America instead of in third world nations.

Supply side economics works when it is done like a pinata. Wealth trickles down when you beat rich people with sticks. That is the ONLY way it works.

No one hates the wealthy more than Republicans. For every dollar in tax cuts Republicans run up $20 in debt. And who it going to pay off that debt?

So, they hate everyone then?

Yes, they hate everyone. Who do Republicans NOT hate? Besides themselves, of course. They want to overthrow society and take everything for themselves.

Charles Manson thought the Beatles song "Helter Skelter" was a secret message for him to trigger blacks to overthrow white majority. Then, when blacks proved unable to govern, Manson would take over.

Some militia member planned to bomb a police funeral and trigger a revolution against the government.

Glenn Beck followers store up food and ammunition expecting a revolution.

McVeigh killed hundreds to punish government.

You might call these the "crazies" but others within government are trying to overthrow it with tax cuts that bankrupt the national economy, causing civil unrest so they can seize power. All evidence points in that direction. Tell me what other objective Republicans have in their obsession with tax cuts. Republicans lie for votes then rob the treasury- why? Just for their own greedy selves? There is more to it.

Another example is when, forty to fifty years ago, left wing violent radicals tried to trigger revolution with bombs and murders. Now right-wing violent reactionaries are doing the same thing.

In the 1930s there was a "crime wave" of violent cirminals such as Bonnie and Clyde, John Dillinger, Pretty Boy Floyd, Babyface Nelson who could be seen as the vanguard of a violent anti-establishment revolution had not FDR and WWII not intervened. These criminals were romanticized because they expressed popular will.

Revolution is closer than you think.

eap1 hates American government and seeks to destroy it with tax cuts. He says to straight out- "By the way, what is patriotic about paying taxes?"

I don't know how much more obvious he can get. If American government were overthrown, then what? Does eap1 dream of seizing power like so many other loony-toons conspirators such as Manson?

You pay taxes to facilitate the society in which you belong and have responsibilities to so that said society can then facilitate you in your future endeavors. Paying taxes is patriotic because it keeps the American government going and to be anti-the American government is to be anti-American patriotism. If you do not facilitate the society in which you live you are un-patriotic to the society in which you participate in.

What is a loser? Someone who works hard, but doesn't make as much money as you? Why do you think you're a "winner" for the fact that you make more money? The vitriol in your comments suggests that your income doesn't make you any happier than those who make less, so care to explain how you are a "winner?" Are you more satisfied w/ life? What evidence do you have to prove that? Are you better off? What evidence do you have of that?

What was the original purpose of government? Why does government not need to grow and contract to fit the needs of society as society grows and contracts? Why do you not like to pay for people who cannot work? What have they done to harm you? Do you hate disabled people? Or do you assume all people who receive government assistance are lazy? Do you realize you receive government assistance? Does this make you lazy as well?

Why does your ego prevent you from seeing yourself as a part of society? Your own language shows that you have an entitlement mentality and that you are selfish, greedy, and unable to have sympathy for other humans. You may not like people saying that, but this only shows your inability to objectively assess your own statements. You believe that because you are the bread winner you should receive a blow job w/o comprehension. Tell me why this is an OK mentality? Do you know what a sociopath is? Why not research the term and explain to me how you do not fit the definition of a sociopath? Explain how it is that your entitlement mentality is somehow better than that of those who "sit on their butts and not work?" Why are you better and they are not? Does income make you better? How? Prove it.

How does the American government not facilitate the means by which you earn your own income? Prove it. How then can you argue your money is "yours?" Prove it.

"that's not the government's money, it's ours." What a nutter. It's ALL the government's money, not yours. How much will your money be worth if there is no government? Or maybe you can not plan that far ahead.

"I want it to serve it's original purpose" which is collecting taxes. And if you were smart you could spell its.

"The government should... not excessively tax me." And what is "excessive" besides any at all? Most Americans pay little if any federal income tax. Even the richest pay barely 20%.

"I'm not the one coming on this post crying like a baby because my nanny state might be taken away" except that you are. Waa! Waa! Waa! Cut my taxes! It's all you know.

"Why are you entitled to steal it from me?" Constitution says so. If you don't like it go to Somalia and be a pirate.

"The fifth amendment guarantees my right to my property" except "your" money is not your property.

I'd like to know what world Republicans envision. What goal do they have with endless tax cuts, debt, and cuts in benefits?

The numbers do not add up. The feds can never cut enough benefits to pay for tax cuts because most benefits come from the state. Nanny state? Cut what programs exactly? As if a winger knew...

FICA pays for Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment insurance. Medicaid, food stamps and what else are federal means-tested entitlements? You are not going to balance the federal budget by cutting funding to Planned Parenthood, National Endowment for the Arts, National Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

I'd like to see any winger explain their objective if not intending to provoke violent revolution by bankrupting the national economy with tax cuts and reinstating the aristocratic system. That is why the call themselves conservatives. What else are they trying to conserve but the pre-revolutionary aristocratic system?

A loser is someone who leaches off the hard work of others. So, if you collect money from the government for long periods of time without any effort to support yourself, you're a loser.

That is not what the Constitution says nor the Bible. You are neither an American nor a Christian.

Covah, I never said I was a Christian did I?

Are you a birther? Do I have to show you my long form?

Any able bodied person in the United States that is poor chooses to be.

I'm not quoting the Bible or Constitution. That's just my opinion. I can tell by your reaction that you are either poor or don't work at all. But amazingly you have internet access. I guess you're not so bad off after all...

How much will your money be worth if there is no government?

Still waiting.

"The constitution says you're entitled to steal from me?" Yep.

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes

Yawn ZZZzz...

"Prove my money isn't my property. Should be simple right."

Whose name does it have on it?

Who's going to pay for your tax cuts?

Still waiting.

I didn't know you were in congress. I asked what entitled you to steal from me. Who do you represent?

My money would be worth more if there was no government because all of their money would go out of circulation and its value would increase. I could still trade for goods here and I could use it to trade with foreign states.

I fail to see what your point is here. You don't seem to understand that the government works for us not the other way around. You have a slave mentality. I truly pity you. So are you poor or do you not work? You've yet to answer my question.

If there were no govt, you would just have pieces of paper. You'd do just as well with monopoly money. I bet you invested all you could on GoldLine cos Beck told you to didn't you? How's that working out for you?

Besides, the dollar has been off the gold standard since Nixon. And America's economy was never stronger than after World War 2 when the tax rate for millionaires was FAR higher than it is now. But no doubt what is going on now is YOUR idea of an ideal economy.

Hahaha! Not goldline! But don't worry, my money is well hidden from the government so when it comes to take it like it's going to take everyone else's pension, they can't get their hands on it.

And once again you're wrong. The tax rate on the rich had nothing to do with it. Stop reading that revisionist history.

I asked what entitled you to steal from me.

I'm not, nor is the Government. But if I provided goods or services to you, I would be entitled to payment. The Government provides services to you, including protecting your property and dealing with criminals, regulating business to suppress fraud and protect the environment, prepare for disease epidemics and disasters, safety regulation, etc. Your taxes pay for those services you receive, and if you are wealthy, you've got more property to protect thus should pay more.

When you get goods and services from a business and pay for it, can you tell that business what they can and cannot do with "your money" that you paid them? Of course not, if that business wanted to spend it on the CEO, or employee bonuses, or for charity, that's their decision. So why should it be different when the Government provides services you pay for? Well, there IS one difference, you do have representation in Congress that you can petition for your ideas as to where the money is spent - along with millions of other citizens. Unless you own shares, you don't have representation in a Business.

You don't seem to understand that the government works for us not the other way around.

Oh but I do understand that. What you don't seem to understand is that the Government works for all citizens, not just you, and the taxes you pay belongs to the Government, not you. If our Government Representatives decide to spend their money on the Military, or Research, or Hiways, or Welfare, it's their decision, not yours. Of course, you're free to state your case, complain, even vote for or against your representative - just like millions of other citizens.

you communist dog you! (sarcasm, =3)

but really, don't ever say "fair" share and think you will get away with not being called a commie. (and i'm speaking of communism of Marx, not the BS Lenin came up with >.>)

You can spend as much as you want on programs FOR the taxpayers when a city or state or country is making money, because of that tax base.

I do not agree. As a matter of countercyclical fiscal policy, I believe the government should cut back on supportive benefits when the economy is doing well, because the benefits are not needed as much (assuming private sector is doing its part). In boom times, the government should continue to take in taxes, borrow less, and reduce the deficit/build a surplus -- while trimming support programs like unemployment, subsidies, and the like. Then when the economy suffers a downturn again (as it inevitably will given the cyclic nature of our capitalist system), the government should be in a position to reinvigorate those support programs which are needed due to a weak private sector. Increasing the government budget deficit during economic slack times is an important part of fiscal policy. Our government's fiscal policy should work in concert with our capitalist economy to smooth out the effects of boom and bust cycles on its citizens.

Actually, there should be no need for government to decide to cut back on supportive benefits when the economy is doing great, as the programs have specific guidelines as to who is eligible in the first place. When the number of unemployed goes down, benefits paid automatically drops, the same with food stamps, welfare, etc.

The cut backs may occur without specific government action, true enough, Uffdaguy. Or in some cases the government may take action to curtail specific supportive programs that do not have eligibility thresholds, such as business subsidies or tax incentives for investment. In both cases support is reduced, either through government action, or through the support program structure itself, when the economy is doing well. Good to add that clarification. Thanks.

That's the biggest Libertarian mis-assumption in a nutshell. The assumption is that greed, both corporate and personal, naturally stops at a reasonable level. It doesn't. Ergo the need for rules and laws (*gasp* "standard practice") over and above simply tort laws and the Constitution.

I forgot to include in my post that the decreasing transfer payments and increasing taxes that occur during economic prosperity without government action are usually called "automatic stabilizers".

A good example is the bail out of General Motors. Feds bought stock with taxpayer money, took over the company and fired its incompetent managers, then sold the stock back in the "new" GM. Even if the feds do not get back as much as the paid for the stock they will be ahead in savings on "supportive benefits".

This is funnier than anything I've read in a long time. Covah- I assume by implication that the government kept all the competent managers at GM?

And you need to do a deeper dive on why the government can use our money to buy out GM when it is the governments money and not ours. This is Rachel logic- you've been listening to circularity too long. The following are your own statements...

1)What a nutter. It's ALL the government's money, not yours,

2) (pasted a quote to make a point, then responded) "Prove my money isn't my property. Should be simple right." Whose name does it have on it?,

3) example is the bail out of General Motors. Feds bought stock with taxpayer money

Bush II did an across the board tax cut. Why not take the class warfare issue out of the picture and suggest a counter to the Bush cuts- an across the board increase that would put us at the Clinton Rates for everyone.

Rusty, these people are happy not paying federal income taxes. They just want to spend other people's money, not theirs.

Meaning the benficiaries of the tax cuts. Wars are expensive. To decrease revenue while conducting TWO WARS is way beyond STUPID. Tax cuts during wars and recessions are criminal, as are everyone who gets them. Anyone who prospers in this environment needs to be investigated. Not rewarded.

You mean we can't increase our spending with new wars and still cut the amount of money coming into the treasury? Gee, that's pretty radical, thinking that you can't balance the budget by cutting income and increasing spending. It goes against all right wing economic theory! I've decided to convert my personal spending habits to conform to right wing economic thought, and will immediately ask my boss to cut my salary by 25%, and then go out and buy a Lamborghini and a new lake house. By doing so, I will actually increase my income! It's so simple even a caveman can do it!

Don, then the solution is to bring our military home.

Don- bring the troops home. Bin Laden is dead. Repeal the Bush tax cuts. Across the board. If it's criminal on the high end of the spetrum, then isn't it criminal on the low end of the income range as well?

I'm all for bringing the troops on home. As for tax rates for the lower classes being criminal...tax cuts don't mean a goddamn when you are unemployed or underemployed. I'm entirely happy to pay my share when I've got the paycheck. Being a tax paying citizen is a privilege. One that greedy criminal bastards feels they should be exempted from. If they've done well in this wonderful land, the least they can do is leave a tip.

Don- I am assuming that you are in full belief that the best course of action for an un/underemployed person is to sit and carp on Rachel's blog, awaiting the next Stimulus plan.

Might have better spent some time watching the Oprah finale today.

All that said- how would your life change if Warren Buffett or Bill Gates paid twice the taxes they paid last year?

Mind your own damn business. If the owners of the means of production weren't fattening their bottom lines on cheap overseas labor and compounding the deficit with tax cuts on top of payroll tax not collected by not paying Americans during a time of MULTIPLE WARS...gosh I don't know, what do think Einstein?

If your question is to me, I think your arguments are fulll of populist propaganda, pie-in-the-sky "Leave it to Beaver" and "Marcus Welby" realities. I'm not for sure the Cleavers were actually reality back then, but that era is past. I happen to work for one of the largest exporters, $$$ built in USA and going overseas. The company also has plants overseas. Much more goes out than comes in, but the long term goal will be to produce where sold. That's reality. Not greed, other countries don't want us to dump product into them without facilities on their soil.

Funny, most of the middle class own stock in those "greedy" companies that are fattening their bottom lines. They'll retire on that money one of these days while they're using the extremely cheap products that were produced over seas. I guess it's the middle classes' fault after all.

The graph is here: http://is.gd/miXdt8

The "fair tax" you are speaking of is anything but fair. If I make $50K, and I pay 10% of my salary as tax, that leaves me $40K to live on. If a person who makes $1M a year pays 10% of their earnings in tax, they still have $900K to live on. Who do you think will have to pinch more pennies to pay mortgage, utilities, gas, food, etc.? We have had libertarians come on here and refer us to "fair tax" websites, some of which had calculators to allow you to figure your taxes. I'm solidly middle class, so I followed the exercise to see what the result would be. It turns out I would pay more than twice as much in taxes as I do now. After reflecting on this, I realized I should not have been surprised. The far right continues to do all they can to facilitate the upward redistribution of wealth, and what better way to do so than to hide a massive tax increase on the middle class under the innocuous-sounding term "fair tax"?

The far right continues to do all they can to facilitate the upward redistribution of wealth, and what better way to do so than to hide a massive tax increase on the middle class under the innocuous-sounding term "fair tax"?

Exactly "Fair tax" is anything but fair.

Agree with Uffdaguy and Covah. Those who have more should contribute more.

@uffdaguy: so your telling me right now you are spending 100% of your income besides taxes? on all those things like bills and food and the such?

if 10% of your income is a major loss, and you will have trouble making ends meet maybe you should learn to budget better. >.>

btw your math sucks, 10% of 50000 dollars is only 5000 dollars. you would be left with 45,000 for that year.

and your looking rather short sided in my opinion. yes it will actually be an increase in your over taxation, but look at it this way, at least we will be taking in money. you want to government to work, give it the ability to with your taxes. and across the whole a 10% tax on income is much lower than the average tax rate of the country.

First of all, sorry for the math error. Nor did I say that I am spending every penny if 10% of my money goes to taxes. Like most righties, you apparently think you can win an unwinnable argument by personal attack. Not happening here, sport. Good job of setting up a straw man to knock down.

Ok, let's play the game this way. If I can get along on $45K, then everyone should be able to do so, right? So why not tax everyone so that they have $45K left after taxes? It's as nonsensical as the "fair tax". If it's an increase in my taxes, that's ok for you, but I'm betting that if I proposed a similar doubling of taxes on the rich, you'd come out with some claptrap about "not penalizing people for their success", or " the rich pay too much in taxes already", or "the rich invest their money in creating jobs", all of which are nothing more than self-serving garbage.

first of all i was not attacking you personal, i saw a hole in your argument. second i'm a college student, a liberal, pro communism. (marx social and economical communism, not Lenin's BS and everything to follow.)

i think that the rich should pay more. and they do with a fair tax system. 10% of 10 million is more than your 10% of 50,000.

stop assuming things about other people. my questions we're inquiry to how exactly 5000 dollars killed your life style.

i never said i was good at arguing but at least i didn't make assumptions :P

@ toofu, the problem with these guys is that they want all the benefits of government but don't want to actually provide anything. They're very charitable...with other people's money. Everyone paying taxes is essential to The Republic. Taxation without representation is just as bad as representation without taxation. These non-federal tax payers might as well be illegals. They're leaching off the system without giving anything back. I wonder how many actually volunteer their free time to those less fortunate. All they do is take and never give back.

On the face of it, a flat tax has the appearance of fairness and equality. Unfortunately, simply saying "[x]% across the board" assumes a level playing field and ignores the realities of life in a complex society.

Just as a single example, those with less money typically live in areas where it is more difficult to access good quality food at an affordable price. Poor diet is a major contributor to poor health, which can lead to absence from work or school. Jobs that pay lower wages or are non-union are generally less forgiving of extended or repeated absence, no matter the reason, and repeated absence from school has a direct impact on grades.

Stressors that stem from low economic status are very difficult -- though not always impossible -- to overcome. As consolidation of wealth continues in our country, pulling oneself up by one's own bootstraps becomes much more the exception than the rule.

I will stop assuming things about you, and I hope you will stop assuming things about me. I never said $5K would kill my lifestyle, because first of all, that $50K was a hypothetical number, and secondly, because I already do a damn good job of budgeting my money.

Please take a second look at my reasoning. The rich may pay more under a so-called "fair tax", but it disproportionately hurts the lower and middle class. I have been on a few of those "fair tax" sites, and anyone who takes time to use their own calculators to find out how they would fare would discover that unless they are in upper income tax brackets, they will be paying significantly more in taxes. Some of them counter by saying that they could implement the same system with a national sales tax of varying amounts, usually about 23%. Of course, you'd still end up paying local sales tax, state sales tax, and state income tax, so once again, you end up paying more taxes, especially if you are lower and middle income. Those proposals also usually come with a kind of "credit" proposal, whereby you would fill out a form each month, submit it to the government, and get back some of that tax money if you are in lower or middle income brackets. These are the same people who detest the IRS, because they make you fill out a tax form once a year, and are supposedly inefficient. They want to replace it with a system that takes more money from you initially, forces you to fill out a form every single month, and sets up a bureaucracy that processes those hundreds of millions of forms each month and then sends you a check. Seems like a lot of extra work to simply fleece the lower and middle classes and give the money to the wealthiest Americans.

I want my tax dollars back from oil and energy subsidies and from the war in Iraq, from the extraordinary rendition program and enhanced interrogation, from the money paid to Xe/Blackeater because I do not support the murder of civilians with impunity, theft of weapons or the prostitution of children.

Did you pay federal taxes during that period?

Until three years ago and I filed this year as well. The reason we've not been paying federal taxes is because the people who get the tax cuts DON'T CREATE JOBS. The jobs they create are in third world countries that don't collect payroll tax for the American Govt. That creates a deficit. Giving these bastards tax cuts COMPOUNDS THE DEFICIT!

They're leaching off the system without giving anything back.

The only thing I've taken from the govt was income tax refund. You blow that "welfare queen" dogwhistle at the same time you blow the "public unions are a threat to the nation" dogwhistle. I kinda hope you forget to breath.

So you don't pay federal income taxes and you propose to tell the government what to do with mine? Why do you want to take away my livelihood? I'm not rich.

"These non-federal tax payers might as well be illegals. They're leaching off the system without giving anything back."

eap1 is correct. For too long politicians have been scamming votes with promises of tax cuts. People vote to cut their taxes and lose their jobs and their homes pensions and benefits and wind up poor, sick, and dead.

47 percent of the American population pay no federal income taxes, how much more do you want to cut?

So you don't pay federal income taxes and you propose to tell the government what to do with mine?

If you want the govt to spend your tax dollars on subsidies forbloated richer than gGod energy companies, the death of American soldiers in unnecessary war of choice and on child prostitution, then that's your look-out isn't it?

Why do you want to take away my livelihood?

And this is apropos what? What the hell are you talking about?

I'm not rich.

Just wealthy enough to afford private schooling for your children, which is better than my family ever did. Render unto Caesar and don't whine about it.

DonQ, you don't get your money back. I was reading up top where the money you think is yours, actually belongs to the government. Covah can clarify if necessary. She is certain you don't have anything because it all belongs to the government.

"You can't suggest that taxes alone changed the business cycle..."

Uh, yeah, taxes alone ARE sufficient to explain the business cycle. There are booms and busts all the time. In the 90s some were the first Gulf war, Mexican peso crisis, the Russian stock market collapse, the Asian currency crisis. The dotcom was only one of a string. Those things happen continuously. As Robert Rubin explains in his autobiography it is the responsibility of the federal government to maintain economic equilibrium in the face of these crises.

The only determining factor in national economic health is preventing Republicans from robbing the treasury with tax cuts. Even at this moment the Bush tax cuts are in effect and where have they gotten us.

"in the early 2000's 9/11 contributed to a stagnating economy"

After 9/11 Republicans and Democrats raised the debt ceiling, cut taxes, and cut interest rates to boost the economy. It worked. However, Republicans and some Democratic quislings continued the economic stimulus after the crisis passed, creating a bubble that burst.

I always expected the feds to raise interest rates but they never did. I thought the feds were waiting for inflation before raising the rates but inflation never came because foreigners were buying up treasury bills, thus holding the inflation-causing surplus cash in reserve.

What caused the downturn were CDOs containing a few bad mortgages. Because no one knew which mortgages were bad in a CDO no one wanted CDOs and they became "toxic" and lost value, especially since they really had no value in the first place- AND they were insured. Financial service companies who had assets parked in CDOs were wiped out such as Bear Stearns. Conversely Goldman Sachs shorted their own product because they knew it was bogus.

Since eap1 is so smart let's see him define "moral hazard".

Moral hazard is how a group acts when no longer exposed to risk. Much like everyone on welfare does or everyone on unemployment. They fail to seek out employment because they are now subject to the nanny state. Thank you for making the best case anyone possibly could for not handing out entitlements!

Or even better, homeowners who stop paying their mortgage because they made a bad purchase. They blame the bank, stop making payments, pocket the money, get evicted and place a huge down payment on a new house at a lower value. Pretty much the root of almost all of our economic woes right now.

The perfect liberal philosophy, not taking responsibility for one's actions when it suits them and there is little or no recourse. Wow, you liberals sure love your "moral hazard."

"Moral hazard is how a group acts when no longer exposed to risk." Yep. Robert Rubin in his autobiography says when the feds maintain a stable system it increases moral hazard but that hazard is the price to pay for a stable system. As we saw under Bush no attempt was made to maintain a stable system so stock market and real estate bubbles grew and popped and wiped out the national economy. Is that the price you want to pay?

Much like every Republican on tax-cut welfare does or every Republican on a debt-fueled spending binge. They fail to pay taxes because they are not subject to the nanny-state debt. Thank you for making the best case anyone possibly could for not handing out tax-cut entitlements!

"They blame the bank, stop making payments, pocket the money, get evicted and place a huge down payment on a new house at a lower value" WHAT'S THE MATTER, YOU HATE CAPITALISM?

I was unaware that Bush was the Chairman of the Federal Reserve. I thought it was Alan Greenspan...the same guy that did the job for Clinton.

By the way, I know this might be hard to process, a tax cut is not an entitlement. People actually earn an income and the government takes it.

A landlord owns several houses. He collects enough in rent from everyone that he is not only able to keep the houses in good repair but is also able to to cover for a tenent for a while when they come up short. The wealthiest tenents decide that they deserve a break on the rent...maybe they are lazy greedy scumbags who don't feel like paying their fair share. Whatever. The short fall means that the landlord can no longer help cover tenents who come up short. It also means that when when pipes burst the tenents had better learn to swim because there isn't enough money to do anything about that either.

Moral: The wealthy scumbags who don't pay their fair share steal from ALL OF US!

The solution: Bring in more tenents,i.e. tax payers. Wealthy scumbags who don't want to pay their fair share own or manage companies that do off-shore manufacture/assembly. Their bottom line be damned, its time to bring those jobs back home to America, because the economy IS our National Security. Businesses that engage in offshore manufacture keep America weak and their own markets at home shrunken. People who can't afford don't buy.

Millions of people who couldn't afford bought, and they brought this economy to a halt.

Millions of people were conned. That is what Republicans regard as an effective business model.

How were they conned? Are you saying that the average American isn't as smart as a Republican?

I'm saying Enronesque managed risk hidden debt caveat emptorstyle business from subprime loans to TOXIC TOXIC TOXIC mortgage backed securities to an energy policy that led to rolling blackouts in California to war profiteering on the behalf of companies that are awarded MORE contracts AFTER their shower installations ELECTROCUTED American service men TO DEATH in the field. To trying to stimulate the economy with TAX CUTS while engaged in TWO WARS, to keeping the war and medicare expansion OFF THE BOOKS so that NOBODY even KNEW how much money was being spent...because as Dick Cheney famously said "Deficits don't matter." Not to mention how the Bush/Cheney Administration LIED and TORTURED America into an UNNECESSARY WAR OF CHOICE that we could ILL-AFFORD!

Are you saying that the average American isn't as smart as a Republican?

No. Just not as criminal Republican politicians,or as easily duped as Republican voters.

How were homeowners conned? False promises and "predatory lending".

"Are you saying that the average American isn't as smart as a Republican?"

Hey, they walked away from debt. Isn't that every Republican's favorite strategy?

"Millions of people who couldn't afford bought, and they brought this economy to a halt."

Uh, no. Current economic crisis is a liquidity crisis cause by high finance leveraged debt. House prices go up and down all the time. Easy credit in the Bush years caused a housing bubble that burst. That by itself did not cause the collapse of the Western economy.

Alan Greenspan said on Meet the Press that ALL the Bush tax cuts should be repealed.

"a tax cut is not an entitlement" since when? How convenient to call "entitlements" handouts for bums when the rich get the most handouts of all.

"People actually earn an income and the government takes it." Yep. that is what the Constitution says. If you don't like it then you are free to leave.

Better analogy, Don, in the spirit of goofiness you are displaying. The government decides that the landlord is the wealthy one, and orders him to foot the entire bill for the complex. The Secretary of Rental Units declares that anyone who is below the median income level of the community gets to live there rent free. Since half of the people are below the median level, they all vote for the party of the Sec of Rental Units. The elected person, seeing that this policy only gets him half the votes, changes the policy to free rent for the bottom 51%. He is re-elected. The landlord raises rent on the upper 49%. They find better forms of shelter. The landlord goes broke. MSNBC, led by Ed, decries the greedy landlords and the greedy people that moved out. Don Q curses the greedy people, and demands answers as to why these greedy people don't give more to the people living there rent free. Covah points out that all the money really belongs to the government. Then Covah calls on the government to use taxpayer monies to buy out the landlord. Don Q curses again. Rachel leads her audience by teaching them about economics in this situation, the economics of the evil landlord who no longer provides shelter.

Your math is wrong. It's 132.

You pointed out something that really irratates me about comparing current economy to past economy...Where is the apple to apple comparison. If an apple cost 25 cents in 1985 and minimum wage was $3.10 and an apple now cost $2.50 in 2011 with a minimum wage of $8.50 or whatever it is now...where is the dollar to value adjustment shown in the graph comapring the VALUE of the debt and deficit to pre-Bush and pre-Obama? I can use graphs too to tell I either have it good or I have it bad, depending on what information I allow in my graph.

Peggy, the government is not like an average citizen in this regard. Government spending should not match income (taxes). We need the government to run a deficit during lean economic times, then reduce the deficit/build a surplus during prosperous economic times. A balanced budget is the worst thing for the federal government to strive for. Government's fiscal policy is needed to help smooth out the inevitable boom and bust cycles of our capitalist economy. The mistakes that were made when tax rates were reduced during prosperous times thus failed to allow government to pay off debt/build a surplus when it should have done so.

Reducing the deficit/build a surplus during prosperous economic times is exactly what the Republicans did NOT do during real estate run-up which was an obvious symptom of credit gone wild.

Right now deficit spending is required to boost weak economy but that spending is NOT being sucked up by taxes on those who do not need the money. Eliminating Bush tax cuts now will not weaken the economy because only the employed pay income tax. Expanding benefits expands the economy as a whole and increases investment return. Ryan's plan to pay off deficit by cutting social services will reduce the size of the economy and reduce investment return MORE than the tax cuts save because that is how it always works.

Covah, I think you and I are in agreement...?

"We need the government to run a deficit during lean economic times, then reduce the deficit/build a surplus during prosperous economic times" is basic Keynesian economics. Republicans deny Keynes because Keynes was right. Republicans prove they know Keynes was right by doing the exact opposite intending to bankrupt the national economy.

The opposite of Keynes is Milton Friedman. Friedman says government disrupts the natural economy and the free market. Friedman is always wrong.

Friedman wasn't wrong about anything. Obviously you haven't read his work. He predicted we'd be where we are now. Funny, Keynesian economics is what got us here...

Right, Pinochet's economists. Sterling reference.

Yikes, when someone has to take Friedman as a sterling example of how economies should work, back away from them very slowly and don't look back. When you have to have your economic theories put into practice with military repression, "disappearing" people, using death squads, then you have to question the basic validity of the entire system. Friedman is a criminal in my book, and he and his disciples should be treated as such.

Put the kool aid down and actually read his work not his reviews.

It's funny how the people in charge of academia fought to hard to be heard in the 60's and now fight to suppress dissent just as hard.

The World Bank and IMF both operate of Friedman principals of the Shock Doctrine. Basically it all amounts to destroying the economies of distressed areas, destroying the quality of life for the people who live and struggle there and buying up all of the resources at pennies on the dollar. Like what we are seeing with the Emergency Financial Managers in Michigan. It is not conducive to promotion of wide-spread prosperity or democratic processii. Its sole concern is making a profit and looking good on balance sheets. Rational solutions are easy and simple of you ignore human suffering. Just smart accounting really.

"Friedman wasn't wrong about anything. Obviously you haven't read his work. He predicted we'd be where we are now. Funny, Keynesian economics is what got us here..."

Evidence?

Any economic system that requires armed force to impose it probably is something that the citizens don't want. If you need to put people in detention centers, kill them with death squads, abduct and torture them....who gains from that? Answer: the power elite. In places like Chile where Friedman's theories were put into practice, unemployment jumped to levels seen during the Great Depression, people starved as even basic foodstuffs became too expensive for many to purchase, many lost homes as they became too expensive to own, but at the same time, the power elite got formerly government-owned industries and properties at fire sale prices. They then promptly ran their new acquisitions into the ground, and were bailed out with government money. Yep, we definitely need to emulate such a smashing success.

Average citizens are not like the federal government, Peggy. Read up about governmental fiscal policy and how it is used to moderate economic swings that would otherwise devastate average citizens. A couple of links to get you started are:

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/208363/fiscal-policy

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/04/051904.asp

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/FiscalPolicy.html

how is our government putting money into failing businesses... subsidies for oil companies ???????

i think you have it backwards.

The bailout?

Pretty much paid back by the beneficiaries jackass.

So you are saying that since there is infinite wealth then there is no federal deficit?

Who said "infinite wealth"? Who's the jackass? Can you make a point without acting like a child and name calling?

@ Don, are you saying that you support Bush's stimulus then? If the economy turns around due to stimulus spending are you going to give him credit too?

What do you think these guys are doing, stuffing cash in their mattress? They're investing it so that other businesses grow.

No, not a mattress, they are paying huge bonuses to top executive, hoarding cash in overseas tax sheltered accounts, and investing in "emerging markets" (i.e. overseas). Do I really need to post 10 or 20 links to stories about banks and corporations "sitting on" trillions in liquidity?

The bail-out and TARP and the stimulus would have all been unnecessary had Bush's economic model of across the board deregulation had worked and not opened the flood of fraud and abuse that it did. Instead the entire economic model was based on the same philosophy of "managed risk" that destroyed Enron. The owner of which helped write energy policy. Subprime loans bundled and sold at solid financial products. Gosh when was the last time financial institutions had to get bailed out...oh yeah. Savings and Loans under Reagan, such a GENIUS! What's better was Bush taking the managed risk, hidden debt" idea to such heights as to keep both of the wars out of the budget AND the medicare expansion part D. And STILL manages to burn down Wall Street! Pure GENIUS!

The government takes money from profitable business and gives it to businesses that are failing. That doesn't help the economy, that allows outdated and poor business models to continue at all of our expense.

Profitable business is a few people making billions while turning millions of people out of their homes through robo-foreclosures. Profitable business is making billions off of mortgage backed securities while everyone who bought them loses their shirt. Profitable businesses are criminals who ALL deserve to to investigated to the inside of their toe-nails, NOT REWARDED WITH TAX CUTS!!!

Besides, there's no such thing as "inert" wealth. What do you think these guys are doing, stuffing cash in their mattress? They're investing it so that other businesses grow.

Absolute BS. They keep it in the bank, try to grow it in the Wall Street casino, buy politicians and the facaulty of institutions of Higher Public Education, fund astroturf groups nominally comprised of blue collar folk to agitate against their own best interests in defense of yours. What they DON'T do is create JOBS!

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, there was a time when people just started a business. Small businesses formation is what will get us out of this mess and this administration is hostile to all business.

And you had better be very damned aware of all the mom and pop businesses that Walmart destroys every time they open a store...and they happen to be part of the Mackinac group. Nice one, try again. Maybe you are refering to mom and pop oil wells that James Inhofe is always defending, or mom and pop defense contractors.

Wow, have you ever heard of the internet? I guess no one ever started a successful business there? Just because you don't have the drive and/or education to start a successful business doesn't mean that other people can't.

"this administration is hostile to all business"

Prove it.

The administration hostile to all business was the Bush administration. Less than a trillion in tax cuts cost over ten trillion is lost investment value and more trillions in debt-fueled stimulus spending.

Look up Bush's "Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005" a slap in the face of small business and vetoed by Clinton. Try to get your facts straight.

"Besides, there's no such thing as "inert" wealth. What do you think these guys are doing, stuffing cash in their mattress? They're investing it so that other businesses grow."

Sure there is "inert wealth". What about the stock market? Real estate values?

Ideally banks collect savings and lend them back out. Problem is the financial service industry has gotten out of hand. What social utility is there in buying CDOs? Or the gaming of the stock market with computer-driven algorithms? That is why tax cuts for the rich do not work. The rich "invest" their money by gaming it, not in making jobs. The rich invest in commodity futures, driving up gas prices. Aren't you glad we cut taxes for the rich?

@ Covah, you've already displayed your grossly inadequate knowledge of how a business runs, so there's really no need for me to spell it out. You're just going to quote John Maynard Keynes or Paul Krugman anyway.

The truth of the matter is this. Our huge economic status was built on the closest-to-free-market system the world has ever know. It's been under attack for decades by liberals seeking a more socialist system. No matter how many socialist regimes fall to the way side and no matter how large our wealth has grown due to free market policies, people like you will always propose policies to take from the rich, give it to the poor, and attempt to make us all equal. No matter how many facts I parade in front of you, you're not going to get it. And I assume you will live below the economic means that you otherwise would if you did. Good luck, you're going to need it.

Every rich country in the world is socialist. Name one that is not.

"Our huge economic status was built on the closest-to-free-market system the world has ever known." Except for the communist Chinese. They are blowing the doors off you so-called free marketeers. Go crazy on debt, borrow from the communists, and call it "free market".

What a nutter.

The United States, Japan, Germany, the UK. Well that's four of the top six. That's if you consider France socialist and it's starting to turn more capitalist.

I can see how you liberals toot the Chinese economy that you don't really understand what's going on over there.

eap1 does not know what socialism is. United States, Japan, Germany, the UK are socialist countries, that is, where government owns the means of production. The writers of the US Constitution were socialists. The "enumerated power" are socialist.

Covah, this has to be a joke right. You really don't know what socialism is?

Prove that these governments own the means of production. Prove that we're not a democratic republic.

In Western Europe there was a massive nationalization throughout the 20th century, especially after World War II to ensure Government control over natural monopolies and to some extent industry. Typical sectors included telecommunications, power, petroleum, railways, airports, airlines, public transport, health care, postal services and sometimes banks. Many large industrial corporations were also nationalized or created as Government corporations, including among many British Steel, Statoil and Irish Sugar. Starting in the late 1970s and accelerating through the 1980s and 1990s many of these corporations were privatized, though many still remain wholly or partially owned by the respective governments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government-owned_corporation

Government ownership of the means of production in the Constitution is most obvious in the Post Office, army and navy, and if you think about it, all government services could be privatized. The Fifth Amendment authorizes government take-overs of private business: "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation". The government can buy up stock with taxpayer money and thereby take over the company. This is what they did with GM. That is 100% socialism.

"democratic republic" has nothing to do with socialism.

Since every government service is a government-owned enterprise and therefore socialist, you would have to privatize every government service to eliminate socialism. Libertarians go a long way in this regard, advocating elimination of all government services except protection of private property and military. But even those services could be privatized.

that 's a great analogy .....

All people want to get richer. Don't you want to get richer?

Anybody with a bag full of crack and a gun can get rich, as lots of black kids learned during the Reagan Administration. But is that good for the nation? No.

All people want to get richer. Don't you want to get richer? says Satan. You'd better get down on your knees and pray to God to save you from temptation. What good does it do you to gain the world and lose your soul?

@ Don, wow that was racist. Really offensive. I think you need to apologize to all of us for that.

@ Covah, have you taken a vow of poverty? Please answer this. I'd like to know.

Short answer, eap, is no, not all people want to get "richer." Some people have values that don't include the accumulation of money and "things."

I know that you are incapable of comprehending such a thing, but I assure you, they exist.

John, do you want to retire at any point in your life? That would require that you get richer.

Do you want to give any of your wealth to charity? That would require that you get richer.

Do you want to provide your children with an education? That would require that you get richer.

Apparently you only care about yourself.

Retire? No, that dream died in 1992, me and the rest of my generation will have to work until we can't because of health or death.

I don't have to be "rich" or "richer" to give to charity. Indeed, charities require people as well as money.

I don't have any children. But if I did, honestly, I would rather they have to pay for their own education, it teaches the value of money.

Apparently, you view the world only in terms of money...once again, not all of us have that view.

Well I'm glad you don't mind working until you die, I do. I guess you'll be the Walmart greeter. Because I'll have plenty saved by the time I retire. Unlike you, I've made smart decisions with my money. That is unless the government tries to take away my money like they're doing to federal employees starting today. I guess that's how it goes though. Punish the responsible.

If don't view the world in terms of money, then why do you want to take it from the rich. It's none of your business.

By the way, where to you volunteer?

OMG, this couldn't get any funnier. You're doing this on purpose, right? It's some sort of weird "pick on the liberals" schtick?

Actually its a tragic case of catastrophic head trauma that had been treated with radical a new cybernetic personality implant which had been highjacked by Fox News. If you sniff enough glue, you might actually almost imagine a person is responding. But its really not. No remotely sentient being would consider education non-essential. This thing does.

You're talking a big game, back it up.

This is the part where frustrated liberals resort to name calling once they've lost an argument. You can't pick on a liberal, we all know they're already victims.

It is, isn't it, Don?

Some sort of weird performance art, or something. Making a point about the absurdity of the current economic system, right? Or something about the narrow-mindedness of both conservatives and liberals?

That GOTTA be it, right?

Wait wait, Don....I totally figure it out. It's a "bot"...you know automated software?

eap1 isn't a name, it's an Acronym.

Enhanced Aggravation Program 1 (EAP1).

That totally explains it. I was really going there for a minute. Well, at least I know that I can ignore it now.

Like I said, name calling. No points. You're starting to sound like a child but less clever. Get back to me when you have a point to make.

Again, I already apologized for my math error above, and I also said nothing about my actual income or circumstances. Amazing how many people apparently assume I must be some sort of dissolute deadbeat for having the temerity to say that it's harder to live on $45K/year than $900K/year. I don't have my hand out, earn a darn good salary, have a nice new house and new cars AND am a liberal. It seems the ones who whine the most about people wanting handouts are the ones most likely to demand them for themselves, such as repub governors who talk about secession and big brother government demanding disaster funds for their states, or corporations that get billions in corporate welfare and bailouts, or Tea Partiers who rail against the government, then rally to tell the government to keep their hands off their government healthcare. Repub=hypocrite, an equation as old as time.

You are so right Kevin, it is the people who have less that should pay more and leave the winners to their oh so tiresome rounds of golf, the drudgery of high grade cocaine and call girls and the weary monotony of having people kiss your ass. WINNING is such a chore. Goddamn leech.

Remember, repubs are the party of rape.....raping the poor and middle class so they can have more for themselves, even if that means destroying the country in the process. Reverse Robin Hood steals from the bottom 90% to enrich the top 1%, that's the world they love. Most of them are too poor to even be considered as anything more than dirt on the soles of the shoes of the ultra-rich they defend and vote for, and are too dimwitted to understand that they will NEVER have the kind of wealth that would allow them to benefit from repub policies.

Gracias Uff.

De nada, DQ.

De nada, DQ.

"So if someone works their ass off and gets to a high paying job, they should pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes because they are successful."

Sorry, doesn't work that way. People who work hard at a high-paying job do not pay much in tax because they do not make enough. The cut-off for the top ten percent of wage earners is $113,799. This top ten percent averages only 18.71% income tax. This is not crippling. Everyone else pays less.

You work with money you get money. You don't work with money you don't get money. The ones making the fantastic incomes of tens or hundreds of millions a year are PhDs in mathematics who design derivatives for Goldman Sachs. Those guys do NOT benefit society. They are parasites. They are the ones who destroyed the Western economy with their incompetence and were bailed out and paid themselves many billions in bail out money. Those guys should have the shirts taxed off their backs.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html

Covah, plenty of people don't work and get money from the government. Literally millions do. Where you not aware of that?

eap1, plenty of people don't work and get money from the government. Literally millions do. Were you not aware of that pesky Constitution that goes "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union..."

We are all in it together like it or not. Moral elitist games are unAmerican.

Anyone who wants to play moral elitist games is free to convert to Islam and live in Saudi Arabia where there is a real king whose ass you can kiss.

"plenty of people don't work and get money from the government. Literally millions do."

What could that possibly refer to. Disabled veterans? Or elderly getting back the Social Security that the already paid or unemployed getting their unemployment insurance benefits they paid with FICA?

Were you not aware of that?

I'm really getting under your skin with the truth aren't I. I can't think of any other reason you'd start to make so little sense. You might want to pause for a little while and calm down. You're starting to lose the ability to complete a thought.

One out of every six people is on food stamps, federally funded. Welfare, federally funded. The unemployment extension, federally funded. Get your facts straight. I'm shocked you know so much about it though. You must be on it. You're welcome for paying your way!

Tax cuts and oil subsidies, federally funded. During a time of war no less. What a frickin GENIUS! Why do you hate America so bad?

Unlike Mr. Rick LeForge I use the same internet name on various forums.

Wow, you are dense. Please, please learn about balance sheets.

I love America! I'm not the one that wants to change it to socialism. That's you.

My money would be worth more if there was no government because all of their money would go out of circulation and its value would increase. I could still trade for goods here and I could use it to trade with foreign states.

No, you don't love America. You are one of the traitors who would have this nation destroyed if you thought there would be a quick buck of profit in it for you. I really doubt you are actually smart enough to survive something like that.

Smart enough to survive what? A collapse? There are plenty of country people that will survive. Does that make them smart?

I can tell by your anger that you sense the truth in what I'm saying. That usually happens when someone's long standing beliefs are challenged by someone with superior knowledge on a subject. Don't worry, anger is the first step in the acceptance process.

Smart enough to survive what? A collapse? There are plenty of country people that will survive. Does that make them smart?

Anyone who tries to PROFIT from a collapse is a JUDAS and will be treated suspicion - at the very least - by the next power that steps in to fill the vaccuum. And by your own admission, you desire the fall of our nation and are no patriot.

...(t)hat usually happens when someone's long standing beliefs are challenged by someone with superior knowledge on a subject.

You betray absolutely no knowledge of any subject. Not history, not economics, not logic. You would solve our nation's economic woes by destroying it. That's not patriotism. You really should stop while you are ahead.

Who says he's ahead? I feel fortunate that I have him on ignore, as he is apparently still making a massive fool of himself.

"Never allow a crisis to go to waste," Rahm Emanuel.

Is this administration a "Judas" for doing that? That's one of the liberals establishment's greatest weapons! Oh, the irony!

ROTFL! I never said I wanted a collapse! You're hilarious! Now I'm starting to think that you're messing with me! Funny, too funny.

Uffdaguy, you're not ignoring me now. I see that you don't like being challenged on your sacred beliefs.

I never said I wanted a collapse!

My money would be worth more if there was no government because all of their money would go out of circulation and its value would increase.

You lie.

Did I say I want a collapse, no. Typical of liberals to take a direct quote and then say it says something it doesn't actually say.

Try again please! Actually don't you're amateurish.

eap1=one ape

How dare I misrepresent what you say by repeating what you say verbatim. Maybe you actually never understand what you are saying or are talking about.

Don, that's like saying that Covah is a racist.

eap1=one ape

That is full of racial overtones. Are you a bigot? Moderator, Covah made a racist comment and I demand that it be removed. There's no room here for racists like Covah...

Did I say I want a collapse, no. Typical of liberals to take a direct quote and then say it says something it doesn't actually say.

Was what

How dare I misrepresent what you say by repeating what you say verbatim. Maybe you actually never understand what you are saying or are talking about.

was in reference to.

As for

eap1=one ape

being a racial slur, that is even assuming that we know you are black. We don't know that. I personally assumed I was speaking to a white man who suffered from fetal alcohol syndrome. "1 ape" is an anagram for your screen-name. Personally I thought it was terribly insensitive on the part of Covah as it wrongfully slanders the intellectual prowess of apes. Shame Covah! Shame!

Moderator, I request that eap1 be replaced with an actual ape. It will elevate the quality of discourse in this blog.

Assuming I am white is racist. Do you think a black/hispanic/asian man or woman couldn't speak as intelligently as I do?

You are racist. Plain and simple. Assuming I'm anything makes you a bigot sir.

Dude, I'm not sure that I would risk money betting on you having opposable thumbs and up-right posture...again, apologies to all the apes in the world. For all I know you have scales, certainly all of the R-complex speech you've been giving supports that.

Assuming I am white is racist. Do you think a black/hispanic/asian man or woman couldn't speak as intelligently as I do?

I would not dignify what you say as intelligent. What race am I? Do you know? How stand I with whites, blacks, latinos, and Asians? Any clue? Let me spell it out for you. I was white trash that grew up on the black side of town. My greatgrandfather was Mexican and I don't know whether or not he was legal and it doesn't matter at all. I'm proud of him though he died a long time ago. What affects illegals would have affect him today. In middle school I went to a Magnet School in the most black part of town where I was one of the only three or four white kids in my GRADE. On national standardized test I scored in 97th precentile. Several other BLACK kids in my class scored about as high as me and many many more were far motivated than I was. But that doesn't matter because that was public education and anethma to you. Only losers use public education right? Further more, my wife is black...you want to keep going there? Really? As for Asians, most of my favorite of the teachers I've had in Philosophy, Strategy, and Tactics were all Asian, Chinese specifically.

The only race I have any real difficulty with are redneck peckerwoods who use the N word like a punctuation mark, and the upperclass who owns the world and keep their heels on the throat of everyone else. The top two percent who get the tax breaks.

The fact is that I don't know what your race is, no do I care. No color or religion on earth could exonerate you from being an absolute fascist creep. I would be hard put to even recognize you as human. I've got many faults, racism isn't one of them.

That's like saying someone's not racist because the voted for Obama. You're ignorant and you just showed it. There's no such thing as not racist by association.

You sound more racist now than you did before. You're trying to justify your racism now.

I don't even know what species you are.

I see that you are now at a loss for intelligent comments.

All we are getting out of you is single sentence snipes.[Oh yeah? So's your mama.]

You never said what race you are, or your involvement with other races - though you had said that people who don't pay federal income tax are no better than illegals. Implying that you are no fan of latinos. You are also a foe of public education education and you claimed solidarity with simple joe for sending your children to private school and everyone else who don't are losers. That post had been deleted giving you plausible deniablity when you say that you don't even have kids. More to the point, your...enmity for public education and your attacks on welfare queens - despite the fact that 4 and a fraction white children attend public schools for every black child and there are more white families on welfare than black, it is all a beard for prejudice against black folks. If you ARE black then you've got to be one of those truly bizarre self-hating Tea-Party blacks who don't even hide behind the identity of "a proud black man" who blames all of the ills of the community on Democrats.

Everything you say is delivered with the conviction that everyone believes as you do and is like you, therefore it is REALLY unlikely you are any kind of minority. I could be wrong, but I really doubt it.

I've had the balls to be up-front about my race and my history and my relationships with other races. And you accuse ME of racism and come back with single sentence snipes. Unless you are too much of a coward, its your turn. I've shown you mine, you show me yours. I DARE you.

There you go being racist again. Are you not aware that there are illegals here from many countries? You must assume that all illegals are "Latinos." You're racist and you don't even know it.

Everyone is involved with other races. That's not proof of anything except you're involved with other races. Because you're obviously a racist, this is going to shock you but I know Mexicans that can't stand illegal immigrants! Shocking! Their families came here legally. Does that make them racist?

You're right, I am no fan of public education because it's failing our children. The left has had a stranglehold on it long enough. Time to let someone else give it a try. There's probably no way they could do any worse. I never said people who don't send their children to private schools are losers. I don't even have children yet. All I said was that people who do are much more interested in their children's educations than the average person in America.

Why is it racist to want people off of welfare if more people on welfare are white than black? I don't want blacks off welfare, I want everyone off of it. Why is someone who's black that believes what I do self-hating? That's racist as well. Blacks shouldn't be told what to think any more than anyone else. Are you the judge of what a black man should believe? If you really think that, you're racist.

I already know that not everyone believes the way I do. I'm not here to high five a bunch of people that agree with me. I like being challenged. The people who post here are closed minded and do not.

Finally, I don't need to explain my history of other races to justify my opinion. It doesn't add any quality to my arguments. All you need to know about me is what I've already said. I grew up very very poor and lifted myself out of "poverty." I've done what I believe people should do for themselves and I know it can be done.

And not a word about what race you are.

Anybody with a bag full of meth and a gun can lift themselves out of poverty. That's really not saying alot. As for liberals having a stranglehold on public education, the idea that public education is a waste because people in public schools aren't going anywhere but on welfare or to prison was a meme introduced by Reagan that has gone unchallenged since. The lousy state of education is a triumph of conservatism. No Child Left Behind was about shutting down schools that didn't test well, like closing branch offices of a business that under-perform. Race to the Top could scarcely be called an improvement on that. Educationally, the Republicans have had the ball for thirty years...and still do. As a result, America lags FAR behind nearly all developed nations and a great many 3rd world nations in the areas of math and science.

Back in the day when Liberals set educational policy after Brown v. Board of Education, the idea was that public education could be the means by which marginalized blacks could be infranchised into mainstream society. One of the tools used was the Magnet School program, which I elected to be a part of. under THIS regime, our educational system - our PUBLIC educational system - was the envy of the world. Until we return to the policy of of investment in public education, we are going no-where but down as a nation. You won't find find our future in a bargain basement bin, or with vouchers. People who send their children to private schools do so because they can afford to. Maybe you think that people who have money are just better than people who don't. In which case you problably slobber at the feet of every successful pimp or drugdealer you meet. Hell you might even be one of those yourself. Jesus himself said that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle that for a rich man to enter Heaven, that you can serve God or you can devote yourself to wealth(serve Mammon) but that you can't do both. That you should render unto Caesar what is Caesar's - bringing us back to the criminality of tax cuts during a time of multiple wars and recession. Like education, the federal deficit is another triumph of conservative policy.

Gee, what happened last time we were here? Factories closed, people went on welfare, Reagan gutted welfare, people turned to illegitimate means to survive and discovered they could become millionaires selling crack if they didn't mind never living to see 30 and making crackbabies, crack heads, crack hos, and living and dying by the machine gun and millions killed in crossfire and drive bys. What would have made even welfare unnecessary? If the factories and remained opened and employing Americans! But wait, stop, NOPE! Can't spare a thought toward job creation, gotta get down that deficit by abolishing WEFARE, and SOCIAL SECURITY, and MEDICARE! These aren't the concerns of black folks, this is EVERYBODY'S problem!

Everyone is involved with other races. That's not proof of anything except you're involved with other races. Because you're obviously a racist, this is going to shock you but I know Mexicans that can't stand illegal immigrants! Shocking! Their families came here legally. Does that make them racist?

Are you saying they cheerfully comply everytime they are asked for their pass-port or birth certificate in Arizona and any of the other states that have clones of the Az1070 law? You mean they don't take it badly when they've been deported to Mexico even when they were born here? That's happened. Do you think they are that quick to laugh it off as just another case of breaking eggs to make an omlet? But you are right. When people talk about illegal aliens, the first thing that comes to mind is Canadians sneaking over the border. Or the Irish, or the Vietnamese, all of those Goddamn Russians sneaking over to steal American jobs picking lettuce.

But you know, I could care less about your race. But if you are going to be accusing someone of racism...it usually helps if you actually identify what race you are so we can respect your oh-so-delicate sensibilities. Going by what you are saying, you may be black, you may not be black. You will accuse me of racism WHATEVER I say. Childish much? Really?

But as I said earlier it doesn't matter what your race color rligion or lack thereof is, none of it exonerates you from being a fascist creep. Stop when it sounds unfamiliar:

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
4. Supremacy of the Military
5. Rampant Sexism
6. Controlled Mass Media
7. Obsession with National Security
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined
9. Corporate Power is Protected
10. Labor Power is Suppressed
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
14. Fraudulent Elections


The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.


Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.


The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.


Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.


Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.


Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.


The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.


Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .


Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.


Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.


Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.


Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.


Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
[Your belief that it would be to your personal financial benefit for the the govt and the nation to collapse is bizarre by any but the most anarchistic standard...and not even THEY would ascribe the profit motive as a guiding principle.]

Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

Don, that was just plain masterful! Bravo, my friend!

I need to do a better job of checking my punctuation and grammar before hitting post and I also forgot to include http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html. But but aside from that, yes. And thank you.

Of course, you do know that none of what you have said will make the tiniest impression on the person you are "debating". I gave up on that futile hope, as I know that there are rocks out there that are more receptive than he is. Having him on ignore is a joy!

Even shadow boxing can help keep you fit. i don't expect to change his mind or see anything remotely rational or factual in his post, but I CAN rupture his excuses. That will shut him up for five minutes that he'll go straight back to them. My patience for this kind of fun is not limitless, I'll ignore him when I get sick of it. Right now it is more morbid fascination than anything else.

Well, have at it then and tally ho! Release the hounds!

AAArrrrroooooooh! [howling]

Masterful, really Uffdaguy? You're not doing a good job of ignoring me. At least I can say this for Don, he doesn't cower when someone challenges him. That's ok though. I see you come here to high five everyone that has the same opinion as you instead allowing your beliefs to be challenged. Good luck with the personal growth.

Don, on one hand you say I'm an anarchist and want the fall of the government, on the other you say I'm a fascist. Which one is it? You're playing both sides.

I'm not sure why you're so concerned with my race unless you're in a hurry to stereotype me. The fact that you are so concerned with it makes you sound like a racist. And you've given me plenty of reason to think so. I'm not going to dig through all your comments. If you can't see it, then you have a problem. The irony of this is, this is exactly what liberals do to anyone that disagrees with them. Everyone's a racist. Tea Party, racist. Birthers, racist. Republicans, racist. You don't seem to have any problem throwing it out there when it suits your needs but when you say something that is questionable, you can't believe it!

I thought that the reason that schools were getting so bad is because everyone thinks their child is misunderstood and special and should be hugged when they fail. It's an entire liberal mindset. That's why the only successful liberals anyone ever sees are movie stars, musicians, and politicians. All the people that make this country work (the businessmen) are conservative. They have work ethic. They have drive. We're teaching our children to live like children until they die under the care of a nanny state! You can blame conservatives all day long about education but I've seen what they teach children today and it's a revisionist history that comes down from liberal academia. I mean, speaking of fascism! Indoctrinate them while they're young!

By the way, if it's so easy to become successful, why haven't you? Why are you not paying any federal income taxes? Are you choosing to live in poverty? That's an odd choice. Why would you put yourself and your family through that willingly?

As for your fascism rant, it's utterly stupid and contradictory.

For one, eugenics was a major tool of fascism. Abortion played a major role in that.

There are just as many if not more major female politicians that are conservative as liberal. In fact, Democrats has been hugely sexist against all major female Republican politicians.

The media is in the pocket of the president. Are you serious on that one?

Funny, when universities were protested in the 60's it was a social movement. Now that those protesters teach there, it's fascism? So much for an open dialog.

Good cut and paste job by the way. Where did you get that from? There's so much in there that's meaningless I don't even know where to start. Trying to control the vote? Seriously? Who hasn't tried to do that in any country ever? Fear? Liberals are the kings of fear! The world is falling apart! Global warming! Pollution! The debate is over! This year will be the warmest ever! I mean this year! I mean this year! This year, I really really mean it!

So fascism is just politics? What's your point exactly?

And still not one shred of personal information. Obfuscation by the shovelful and red herrings by the double handful. But not one shred of personal information. Again, I've already shown you mine. Its your turn. Are you larger than a bread box? Do you have webbed feet? Scales? Were you grown in a lab? Oh I see. So long as conceal even the basic facts about yourself, you can tak offense at EVERYTHING I say, call it racist. But that really is a coward's solution because if EVERYTHING is racist then NOTHING is racist and everything you say is worth less than an ape banging on a keyboard. SUCH a VICTIM you are. I will say this. If you ARE a black man then the anagram for ape1 is a really unfortunate choice for a screen name. Unless pea1 was what you were cleverly hinted at. Which in some ways is even worse.

Don, on one hand you say I'm an anarchist and want the fall of the government, on the other you say I'm a fascist. Which one is it? You're playing both sides.

I dunno, let's play that tape again:

My money would be worth more if there was no government because all of their money would go out of circulation and its value would increase. I could still trade for goods here and I could use it to trade with foreign states.

An anarchist roots for the overthrow of all govt out of idealism and principle. It sounds like you would be all for the collapse of the govt and hence America if you thought there would be a quick buck in it for you. You are no anarchist. You are a Judas. It doesn't matter how tightly you wrap yourself in the flag, you would see it burned for filthy lucre. No-one who even half-heartedly pretends at patriotism would ever be caught dead making such a statement. And no new regime that would take its place would suffer to live someone who places their own self-interest above all else. You simply can't be trusted. You sure as hell are no patriot.

All the people that make this country work (the businessmen) are conservative. They have work ethic. They have drive.

So do drug dealers, pimps, hit men, oil execs, hedge fund managers, political lobbyists, and the bastards who moved production overseas and shut down factories and assembly lines here in America. It doesn't mean they are inherently criminal because they are.

I've seen what they teach children today and it's a revisionist history that comes down from liberal academia. I mean, speaking of fascism! Indoctrinate them while they're young!

You talk a good game and this is no the first time you said it, so okay - I call. What is this real history that you keep talking about? Spell it out. In detail.

By the way, if it's so easy to become successful, why haven't you? Why are you not paying any federal income taxes? Are you choosing to live in poverty? That's an odd choice. Why would you put yourself and your family through that willingly?

Personally, it doesn't look like you've had a surfeit of education. If you started out very poor and you never got an education, then you could not have worked your way up out of poverty through the usual channels. Maybe drug dealer? Pimp? Con-man? Grifter? Is it any of my business? No. Is the job you have now any of my business? No. Is the state of your taxes any of my business? No.

So in answer to your question, I say NUNYA. "Nunya?" you say "What's nunya?" NUNYA GODDAMN BUSINESS YOU NOSEY MORE THAN LIKELY CRIMINAL FAUX PATRIOTIC SELL OUT YOUR NATION FOR 20 (CAUSE YOU ARE CUT RATE) PIECES OF SILVER JUDAS!

By the way, if it's so easy to become successful, why haven't you?

It is you and your conservative criminal fellow travellers who insist that success and wealth is easy and that the wealthy deserve special perks like tax cuts DURING A TIME WHEN WAR(S) ARE BEING FOUGHT and the nation is still in the grips of a RECESSION! Recession. That means that jobs are hard to come by, even if you are qualified. Unless you are moral enough to start selling drugs, guns, other peoples property or black market babies. Those are things there's always a market for, and if you the work ethic and drive selling drugs or babies of unknown provenence, you can get rich too. In no time. Unless you get caught.

For one, eugenics was a major tool of fascism. Abortion played a major role in that.

Christofascists and Islamofascists both beg to differ.

Your turn. What species are you? Or are you to frightend and cowardly to tell me? And what is the REAL HISTORY you keep rattling on about? Your turn.

everything you say is worth less than an ape banging on a keyboard

Now you get it.

So you think racism is based on the eye of the beholder? It sounds like you say racist things in front of your friends that you wouldn't say in public.

That's the problem with liberals they don't have any principles. Everything is relative. I guess that's why you don't get it. Well even though you won't understand, I believe that something is racist independent of who you're saying it to. What is your motto, "if I say something racist in the forest and there's no one to hear it, is it still racist?"

Judas? Are you saying that the government is Christ? Or that we should worship the government? Or are you stating your opposition to separation of church and state? Do you pray to the? The fact that you see the government as your god makes a lot of sense now. Now I see why you're so loyal to it. Are you trying to proselytize others to worship the government? It's funny that you call me a fascist when worship of the government is absolutely necessary for fascism to exist.

I don't know what makes you think I don't have an education. Are you implying that anyone successful that doesn't have an education is a criminal? Is that why you hate successful people, because you don't have an education and therefore can't become successful? If that's the case, then you will stay poor. Plenty of people have lifted themselves out of poverty, legally. You're projecting your own weakness on other people.

Assuming that one can only lift themselves out of poverty by illegal means shows your low social standing.

Jobs aren't hard to come by and people who are valuable are kept. I know someone who's worked at a company that's downsized three times and each time his company has found a way to keep him because he's an asset. Most of these companies are trimming the fat and getting rid of non-productive employees. As far as finding a job. Most of the people that I know that are out of work refuse to get some jobs because it's "below them" to do that kind of work. That's what unemployment benefits gets you. A sense of entitlement. I bet you're the kind of person that would let your family starve before doing a job that is "below you." By the way, if jobs are so hard to come by, why are immigrants still flooding our borders and getting jobs?

HAHAHA! So only the religious are fascists? Has there ever been a religious fascist regime? Man you're ignorant.

Am I frightened? The only thing that scares me about you is that now I know there's a segment of our population that doesn't pay federal income taxes and feels entitled to take a portion of every one of my working hours to help them have a better life because they're too lazy to do so themselves.

So you think racism is based on the eye of the beholder? It sounds like you say racist things in front of your friends that you wouldn't say in public.

When you use a word to mean whatever you want it to, the word ceases to mean anything at all. Racism has a very specific meaning. It means to discriminate or denigrate members of an ethnic group or race. So YOU tell ME, who do I denigrate or discriminate against? Racism requires an object of scorn. Who are mine?

Judas? Are you saying that the government is Christ? Or that we should worship the government? Or are you stating your opposition to separation of church and state? Do you pray to the? The fact that you see the government as your god makes a lot of sense now. Now I see why you're so loyal to it. Are you trying to proselytize others to worship the government? It's funny that you call me a fascist when worship of the government is absolutely necessary for fascism to exist.

Christ himself said Render unto Caesar. The govt is Caesar. Patriotism is holding reverence for you country to such a fervor that it approaches religion. To talk like a patriot at the same time you'd be happy to see the govt and your country fall if it would benefit you is treason for the most base of reasons. That is what people who spy on America for enemy nations for money do and that is a capital crime. You and our nation both continue to be safe only because you are ineffectual and are unable to gain a position of any consequence. Thank God.

Plenty of people have lifted themselves out of poverty, legally. You're projecting your own weakness on other people.

How? I'm serious. If success is so easy then why isn't EVERYONE wealthy? And don't give me that crap about character being the key. That is the one thing almost universally lacking in the successful. Many of them are just as criminal as any pimp, drug dealer, or hitman. They are just in a position to buy good PR and made to sound like heroes. Clearly you buy what they are selling.

Still no revelation of your race or who you are - not that it matters. But I DID tell you who I am and what my background was. You are too much of a coward to do the same - are you ashamed of who you are? Suffer from some degree of self-loathing perhaps? Trust me, the reasons I don't like you have nothing to do with the color of your skin. I'm fully capable of hating you for the content of your character.

And what is this REAL HISTORY you keep rattling on about? Saying that everything I believe is revisionism. I'm calling you out, what ARE the facts?

Lastly you are ass-backwards on the plague of liberalism in education and private schools. You keep saying that liberals coddle the children too much and that is the fault of public education, whereas parents who care about their send them to private schools. That is really funny, if parents wanted to send them to schools that don't coddle them and teach them character, they'd be sending them to military academies. Parents send their children to private schools so that teachers will coddle them even more. They are also supposed to be supplied with the very best teaching materials, which public schools funded, by property taxes have a hard time affording. Especially in impoverished neighborhoods.

As for private schools instilling character, well...let's see. Only people who can afford to send their children to private schools do so. Children who attend private schools usually stand to inherit the wealth of their parents who paid for their education. And inheritance remains the very best way to become wealthy in America. Were that not the case, the middle class would be growing as economic mobility moves up-ward. And that's not been the case since Reagan. And not even Clinton reversed that trend. And since Bush the Younger the middle class had been melting into the lower at an alarming rate. People who had middle class jobs previously but lost their jobs have had their economic standing degrade either because of the duration of unemployment, or because they'd been forced to take jobs that put them in the lower class. Pretty lousy return for the investment of a college degree, dontcha think? And as for getting out of poverty without an education and without resorting to crime...just how do you do that?

And as for the character supposedly instilled by private schools, you can be sure that Bush the Younger never attended public schools a day in his life, but there you are.

I know someone who's worked at a company that's downsized three times and each time his company has found a way to keep him because he's an asset.

Uh-huh. It sounds more like quid pro quo. Drug dealing, sex, bribery, or blackmail. Actually ANY of the first three and blackmail becomes the bonus. The fact that he is still around looks suspicious because fortune always favors the ones who rig the games. Its called cronyism. An asset is anyone who could hurt you if they got fired. We can't all be blackmailers. Some of us lack the moral flexibility for it. We just don't have the necessary drive or work ethic. Those things are no substitute for morality, regardless of what dividends they pay.

By the way, if jobs are so hard to come by, why are immigrants still flooding our borders and getting jobs?

For the same reason manufacturing is now done overseas. They are cheaper to employ than Americans.

HAHAHA! So only the religious are fascists? Has there ever been a religious fascist regime? Man you're ignorant.

On the Muslim side it is called Sharia. When Christians first did it, it was the Dark Ages. The Christians are attempting to do it again and the are calling themselves fundamentalists or evangelicals. They are all threats to American freedom and liberty.

....there has never been a religious fascist regime?........

I don't even know where to start w/ that. Please go visit a Native American when you get the chance. Oh and also please don't forget the Nazi's. And the Spanish. And the Puritans. Oh and the Dark Ages where we were controlled by the Catholic church. Oh and the Irish don't forget them. Oh and British come to think of it. As a matter of fact can you name many regimes that were fascist that weren't religious?

Apparently I'm the only one here the is aware that Mussolini was the first fascist.

The Spanish? All of them? Wow, you should let them know that because I don't think that they do. What a scholar. Thank you Mickey for once again showing how little you know. This just goes to demonstrate what I said about our education system. Unable to think and not just regurgitate what you were told. You do know that it's ok to read on your own don't you?

So Don, what you're saying is that you can say all the racist things you want as long as either no one hears them or you're in a group of fellow racists? You're in denial. You don't even know you're a racist. I guess that's not as bad as being a racist and knowing it. Maybe you're not aware of this but you carry your racist attitudes everywhere you go and you treat people differently. So just because you say it alone or with a group of friends doesn't mean that you don't discriminate against others.

The government is Caesar? How is that? Caesar was a president? Wait, he was the congress. No...that's not it. He was an emperor, that's right. Wait, we have an emperor? Who is is? I was unaware.

How do you know that I'm ineffectual and are unable to gain a position of any consequence? I'm of great consequence to you because I support you with the taxes that I pay. I'm still waiting for you to thank me for that. I would think that you'd at least be thankful for the fact that I work hard so that you don't have to. Do you feel entitled to my labor?

So if you didn't send your kids to private school, then how do you know what motivates someone to do so? Do you know anyone that has? Did you ask them? Did they tell you it was to coddle their children? Just wondering.

Do you know any wealthy people? Do you even know what percentage of millionaires inherited it? Can you actually back up anything you say with numbers?

Can anyone understand any of this gibberish? He reads like simple joe on meth. Nonsense after non-sequitor never pausing to take a breath. I predict and aneurysm or stroke in his near future.

I know, tough questions. I'd be frustrated too.

....Eap have you ever heard of the Spanish Inquisition? Why did the Spanish explorers who helped form America travel across the ocean in the first place? You demonstrate such a lack of historical knowledge it borderlines insanity.

Shhhhhh. He claims to know THE TRUTH and everything we know is historical revisionism. I've pressing him, but apparantly THE TRUTH is something you can get only from Glenn Beck for $37.99. As a matter of fact there isn't a word he says that isn't Fox News Rightwing talk radio/blog boilerplate.

He says I am racist but won't say who I am racist against. Won't even disclose his own race long after I have done so. Long on accussations, nonexistant on specifics. Syncophant to the rich and powerful, believes that it would be to his fiscal benefit if the govt and the nation collapsed, yet considers himself a patriot.

I've speculated that he is a traumatic brain injury that got replaced with a prototype cybernetic personality that got hijacked by News Corp. Or he is a man who suffers from fetal alcohol syndrome, race undisclosed. What do you think Mouser? What am I dealing with here?

Yes because the Spanish weren't religious...neither were the Vikings. I guess the Barbarians weren't either. Or the Greeks. Or the Romans. Glad to know! I am so ignorant of history, being that apparently I don't read anything on my own. Gee wizz. I guess anyone who disagrees w/ eap must be stupid. I guess my college degree is just worth bull@!$%#. I mean gawd I'm going to become a constitutional lawyer and this is what I'm thinking??? Obviously I must think that gays are bad, Jews are good, pure capitalism is best, democracy is bad, dissent is wrong, and religion is supreme. Did I sum that up correctly?

Mmmk do I have to put the #sarcasm here or does everyone get my meaning? ^.^

The Spanish Inquisition was fascist? How did that happen? Fascism wasn't "invented" until the 20th century. Is everything horrible that has ever happened fascism? You obviously don't know what it is...

Fox? So if I don't agree with you, I must get my info from Fox? So that means that all the Republicans and most independents get their info from Fox? Interesting. I didn't think their viewership was so high.

Please, the both of you pick up a book and read what fascism really is. Don't go to wikipedia. Actually pick up a book because neither one of you know what it is.

There are plenty of smart people that disagree with me. I meet them all the time. Unlike some people they back up their arguments and don't get emotional and call me names.

Mickey, you obviously don't have the temperament for law. Sarcasm is the recourse of a weak mind. And when you have to point it out it loses any cleverness it might have had.

Have I ever mentioned my opinion on gays? Do you have a problem with Jews? Have I made my stance on religion?

I do believe in a free market however, and democracy is bad. This country was founded as a republic.

Therefore fascism is fine and it is patriotic to want to profit from the failure of your country.

Eap A. you're the one who turned to sarcasm first B. I was merely retorting back to you C. you're wrong sarcasm and comedy in general have historically been used to point out foible in political positions unless you've also forgotten Shakespeare in your right wing universe.

Also i cannot believe you're saying the Spanish Inquisition wasn't fascist....that's just...WOW....it's like you've been educated in a bubble or something...which might explain your ridiculous views. I'd just like to point out to all the sane people there Eap1 just said "the Spanish Inquisition was not fascist." Please, please keep that in mind when you debate such people.

Mickey, you obviously don't have the temperament for law. Sarcasm is the recourse of a weak mind. And when you have to point it out it loses any cleverness it might have had.

By your logic this is obviously the defense of someone who has nothing in which to back his claims up on.

There are plenty of smart people that disagree with me. I meet them all the time. Unlike some people they back up their arguments and don't get emotional and call me names.

What you mean to say is historians like myself. Always funny when the person levying claims says the person defending has to present evidence. Apparently eap is completely ignorant of the rules of debate.

Mickey, you obviously don't have the temperament for law. Sarcasm is the recourse of a weak mind. And when you have to point it out it loses any cleverness it might have had.

In other words when an actual constitutional lawyer challenges you to your words, you cannot do anything but persecute. Recall that I never levied accusations, but you sure as heck did. But no please try to convince the panel that you're the victim when in reality you just don't want to present evidence to defend yourself. You have none. Your only defense is philosophical and sorry to say but your philosophy doesn't out-trump anyone elses. You have no facts; you have no figures. You're a shark in lone waters. The fact that you now focus on me so much also betrays yourself as you're pissed off that *I'd* have the audacity to point out your foibles. Sorry but in a democracy your mom's praise of you doesn't count. You must face the real jury and in your case you've nothing to stand on other than insults. It's so hilarious that in your attempt to say "well you're just insulting me" you have yet to prove yourself right. Hmm? Others have linked their non-biased studies. Oh you can't? Then stop complaining that we call you on it. We are not sheep; you are, and that's you're deal.

Nope this country was founded as a democratic-republic. Sorry, but if you're going to be honest you can't forget your fascism in lieu of my freedom. In reality our founders wanted a combination there of, but be that as it may: wtf does it matter what our founders wanted, hmm? can you answer your obsession w/ the past? Your obsession is a mental disorder in and of itself, but please tell us all why we should conform to it...hmm???

Reminds me of that scene from the original Rocky (about the boxer not the transvestite...tho I'd think of the transvestite first personally) it doesn't matter how long or hard you punch it, it remains one obstinate side of beef. So Mouser, what's the prognosis? Cleverly designed right-wing AI, or fundamentally defective human? Or a dangling side of beef fit only for use as a rhetorical punching bag? I feel like I've gotten a little polish defending my positions against this pullet, this boxing clown dummy. But my patience wanes and it is good to see you step in and work out on him a bit. Don't take no guff from the swine.

Don, you are quite correct. The prognosis on eap1 is difficult. S/he coins the air as one in a game, reveling random selection of levels of play. I will personally be cautious taking anything s/he says as palpable.

edit: And I wasn't checking in on you Don, you okie. =)

Its been such a zero sum game for so long, now I'm just a bystander. Might throw in a sucker punch as the spirit moves. Its occuring to me that maybe it is unsporting to pick fights with the developmentally disabled (to put it kindly.) How was I to know, I thought he was just both stubborn AND stupid. Maybe I'm wrong. But I know that being disadvantaged does not keep one from being an absolute creep and thoroughly unlikeable. So many possiblities, and he's not terribly informative despite his multitude of accusations. Its a puzzle.

As for NOT checking up on this poor Okie, I appreciate it. Thanks post.

I don't know what to say to someone who says the Spanish Inquisition wasn't fascist. That's just...wow.

Just what do you do when short words in big day glow-colors in great big letters fail? Where do you go when the sock puppets fail? I'm honestly afraid we've been over-estimating...grossly...the mental capacity of our opponent. Should I apologize? My hand on the bible, the only time I've heard these kind of arguments was from boys and men suffering from fetal alcohol syndrome. And with equal honesty I've hated the ones I've known. They all have only a passing acquaintance with reality and a tendency toward grandiose thinking and pronouncements. The last one I knew was in prison, in a quasi-paramilitary boot camp program. We called him Skeletor. He bragged about how his family owned the town that the prison was in. Whenever we'd screw up it was customary to do pushups as punishment. Whenever he'd screw up, he'd get shaken down...that is guards would have to strip his bed and footlocker and all his possessions and check for contraband. I honestly don't think it was discrimination on their part, he was just a very special kind of f***-up. Simple joe notwithstanding, the only other time I'd heard the same mix of obfuscation, red herrings and non-sequitors was from these individuals.

I may have to quit playing with him, but I WILL leave one note just for him.

Simple minds, simple world, simple problems, simple answers. ALWAYS WRONG. Simple.

Anyone else see anything I may be missing?

I'm starting to think eap is hatey

Oh my God. [jiggling the pieces around in my head, examines and compares] Maybe. If it is true, he is well on his way toward some serious mental illness. That's even more tragic, if possible. I don't feel nearly so bad about hating him though. Oh Sunshine. Where have you been? What's happened to you?

A key component of fascism is constant warring. What country was the Spanish warring against?

Mickey, you're not a constitutional lawyer. So don't call yourself one. Just because I want to be an astronaut doesn't make me an expert on space flight.

Obsessed with the past? You want to be a constitutional lawyer and you say that I'm obsessed with the past? The irony is amazing! Why are you obsessed with the past?

I don't even know where we're going with this anymore. How can I debate a bunch of people who don't even know what fascism is? It's been used in so many different ways by you all that it's lost its meaning.

Basically your argument is that anything oppressive is fascist. That is a completely ignorant assessment. Fascist is just a name that liberals call people that they don't like. Kind of like racist. Except don over here says it's only racist if you mean harm or some other kind of nonsense. I mean you're actually defending your racism.

By the way, please keep "pounding away." Just remember through all of your childish insults (I mean really, how many times are you going to mention fetal alcohol syndrome) I appear to be the only one that's made anything out of my life here and apparently I'm paying for all of your internet access.

I beg you all again, please stop reading wikipedia and actually pick up a book about fascism or economics or even the founding of our nation (since the "constitutional lawyer" doesn't even know that we were founded as a republic) and educate yourselves.

A key component of fascism is constant warring. What country was the Spanish warring against?

During the Dark Ages the moral authority of the church was thrown behind the military powerof all the nations of Europe and directed against the Islamic Middle East, Jerusalem specifically. It was the middle-ages Western equivalent of Jihad. That's religious fascism. The Spanish Inquisition was formed to root out the threat of Jews and Muslims and especially crypto-Jewish Christian converts as well as the heretical Christian sect of catharism and crypto-catharists in Europe. Get that? Military action abroad on the orders of a religious power, and a religious police state at home. It was the Spanish Inquisition that set the all time high water mark for use of "enhanced interrogation" and of the countless thousand who they "tried" only a small handful escaped burning at the stake. Then of course there was the military, economic, and religious subjugation of the New World...the Caribbean, Mexico (including Texas Arizona and California,) Central America, South America (except Brazil which went to the Portuguese under Papal Edict) and Florida. Everything up to the Spanish Armada which the English destroyed. Merry olde England.

Mickey, you're not a constitutional lawyer. So don't call yourself one. Just because I want to be an astronaut doesn't make me an expert on space flight.

Mouser is the resident authority on debate and logical fallacies. She is also one of the precious precious few who I consider my better. She sure as hell is one of yours. What PROOF do you have that she isn't a constitutional lawyer?

Obsessed with the past? You want to be a constitutional lawyer and you say that I'm obsessed with the past? The irony is amazing! Why are you obsessed with the past?

Which was in response to

Nope this country was founded as a democratic-republic. Sorry, but if you're going to be honest you can't forget your fascism in lieu of my freedom. In reality our founders wanted a combination there of, but be that as it may: wtf does it matter what our founders wanted, hmm? can you answer your obsession w/ the past? Your obsession is a mental disorder in and of itself, but please tell us all why we should conform to it...hmm???

I dunno. Your response looks like a case of straight line projection to me plus there's the matter of this TRUE history that only you and Glenn Beck know and everything everyone else heard is pure revisionism. But you avoid discussing this TRUE HISTORY at all costs. That really can't be healthy.

I don't even know where we're going with this anymore. How can I debate a bunch of people who don't even know what fascism is? It's been used in so many different ways by you all that it's lost its meaning.

Like your use of the word racist? And you still have yet to tell me Who I'm racist against. Proof! What PROOF do you have? Plus I've already said who I am, what my background is. You've yet to have the balls to do likewise.

As for fascism it is a system of govt that denies the will of the people, uses political or even military force to squelch dissent (night of the long knives, the Sunday Sunday Night Massacre of the Nixon Administration, Gov Walker threatening to call in the National Guard as well as the consideration of "false flag" maneuvers against protestors, Emergency Financial Managers in Michigan, the suspension of elected officals in Benton Harbour, the summary suspension and closing of public schools in Detroit.) The police state, the fundamentalist state (Sharia law, Dark Ages Europe, Kill The Gays Uganda sponsored by rightwing American politicans) the racist/Nationalist state (Aparthied South Africa, Jim Crow Southern US, Nazi Germany, Az 1070 in Arizona,) the corpratist state - oh the myth of privatization...can anyone point to an instance where private markets actually cut costs or increased effenciency? But what it does do is give money to companies to buy politicians to further their own interests. Public good be damned. For instance, it doesn't matter that blizzards floods storm and tornadoes are chewing up America like a meat grinder...climate change is a hoax and EPA regulations would pinch the pocket book of those companies that pay Inhofe. Therefore climate change is a hoax. Ignore the man behind the curtain.

These are all types of and features of fascism. Also popular are the fetishization of patriotic/religious symbols. The bible, the cross, the American flag, mom and apple pie, and more recently at the direct instigation of Glenn Beck - Founding documents, the Constitution (and hence the rise of "strict" constitutionalists who want to strip protection for Muslims out of the first amendment, do away with the non-establishment clause that seperates stae and religion, elimainate unreasonable search and seizure for the sake of racial/religious profiling, birthright citizenship, state supremacy over federal, and so on,) the Declaration of Independence, etc. Also popular are cults of personality Chairman Mao ("the truth comes out of the barrel of a gun",) Joseph Stalin, Moussolini, Hitler, the Founding Fathers, Ronald Reagan, and - though sheer self-promotion - Glenn Beck.

By the way, please keep "pounding away." Just remember through all of your childish insults (I mean really, how many times are you going to mention fetal alcohol syndrome) I appear to be the only one that's made anything out of my life here...

We only have your word for that, and the pounding of an ape at a keyboard has marginally more currency than that.

and apparently I'm paying for all of your internet access.

Or would be if you a) actually pay taxes, which we don't know b) if I accepted any kind of tax payer funded assistance, which I do not. The only money I get from the gov is income tax refunds.

So maybe you aren't Sunshine. Maybe you don't have fetal alcohol syndrome. Maybe you ARE just both stupid and stubborn.

I never called myself one; what I was saying is that you cannot distinquish between the bs you say and what an actual professional says. You base your beliefs out of a bubble of information, I'm guessing from Glenn Beck U, and you are unable to rationalize what everyone else says. Nothing I said isn't backed up by historians and constitutional experts. You're the only one who seems to be in a fantasy world. Since Don pretty much explained what fascism is, I guess I don't have to now (thanks DQ!). You already have demonstrated that you don't know what fascism is eap. Again you do not listen to what historians or legal experts say, you go by your own definition. When given evidence that you are wrong you simply say that those historians don't know what they're talking about. That's the whole point. You don't listen to anything that is outside of your bubble and you get angry whenever you're shown again and again to not know what you're talking about. Even here again, in your rebuttle, you provide nothing to defend yourself but insults. You project your inability to defend onto others and then attempt to grandstand by saying "I guess I'm the only one who made something of myself." Quite simply put I wouldn't be surprised if you are unemployed and living off social security. Your projectionism is outright amazing. Back any one of your claims up. You are the one levying accusations and yet you continually refuse to provide evidence for anything you claim. Prove anything that you've said. You cannot because you don't listen to what actual historians and legal experts say. That's all this is about. You refuse to listen to anything that doesn't conform to your world view. This is another classic case of someone making their reality conform to their beliefs instead of the other way around. And that, my friend, means something is wrong with you.

Proof? She said she is going to be a constitutional lawyer. If she's now claiming that she is, she's a liar. Proof enough?

Ok, so your claim about Spain is pretty thin. They were warring with a purpose if you can claim they were warring at all. They were not warring for the sake of warring like true fascists do.

As far as logic goes, I've yet to see one person who had given me any reason to believe they've even taken a logic class. Logic keeps getting thrown around here (like so much else) without anyone seeming to know what logic actually is.

As far as Glen Beck's history, I assure you I have no idea what you're talking about. I read plenty of history and from what I can tell, you're not well versed outside of the anit-Christian, anti-American version that is so popular in academia. The Spanish didn't start the Crusades, "enhanced interrogation" has been used by almost every culture in history and apparently you don't know the difference between imperialism and fascism. And "religious fascism" borders on oxymoron. The fascist state's goal secular and to replace worship of god with worship of the state (which incidentally liberals seem to do.)

Point to where the private market works? How about cheap powerful computer you're using that was developed by a couple of guys in their garages using a OS that was developed by another couple of guys in their garages.

I for one don't believe climate change is a hoax. I just don't think it's man made and know that climate changes all the time. Worldwide climate can't be studied on a small sample of time.

Who wants to strip Muslims of their first amendment rights? Prove it? If you mean stopping the spread of sharia law, I think we can all agree on that. No one has had their first amendment rights trampled on than Christians and Jews. Despite their claims that Islam is a religion of peace, politicians are very afraid to offend Muslims in any way.

Is it possible for you to finish a post without calling me a name? You keep saying how uneducated I am but I've never called you a name. It makes you look like you have the temperament of a child.

Ok, so your claim about Spain is pretty thin. They were warring with a purpose if you can claim they were warring at all. They were not warring for the sake of warring like true fascists do.

Wow. Even I'M rocked back on my heels by that one! "Pretty thin?" "They were not warring for the sake of warring like true fascists do." On what basis do you make your assertion? This is text book world history here! If you dispute our claims then by all means produce your evidence. Saying that it is all historical revisionism is piss. Please, set us straight as to what the REAL historical record is.

As far as logic goes, I've yet to see one person who had given me any reason to believe they've even taken a logic class. Logic keeps getting thrown around here (like so much else) without anyone seeming to know what logic actually is.

Mouser, you up to taking him apart argument by argument?

As far as Glen Beck's history, I assure you I have no idea what you're talking about. I read plenty of history and from what I can tell, you're not well versed outside of the anit-Christian, anti-American version that is so popular in academia. The Spanish didn't start the Crusades, "enhanced interrogation" has been used by almost every culture in history and apparently you don't know the difference between imperialism and fascism.

Absolutely no mention of the Spanish Inquisition. Inconvenient I guess.

And "religious fascism" borders on oxymoron. The fascist state's goal secular and to replace worship of god with worship of the state (which incidentally liberals seem to do.)

Religious fascism is absolutely opposed to the American principles of freedom and liberty. Sharia is religious fascism, as were the Dark Ages, when you could be burned at the stake for refusing to eat pork. In both instances the rights of women and gays are massively impinged upon. Uganda with the Kill the Gays Bill sponsored by American Conservatives and evangelicals Is a Christian Fascist nation. In Sharia nations, women must be covered from head to toe and are forbidden to leave the house without a male relative. Ain't no freedom or liberty to be found ANYWHERE. The attacks on a woman's reproductive rights are another example of religious fascism. "But" you say "abortion was a big part of fascism, what with eugenics and the One Child rule in China" to which I reply "EXACTLY!" The denial of the a woman's right to abortion is as odious as having forced abortions - both are equally fascist because they both deny a woman the right to her own body and to make her own decisions. And if you are going to argue that gays and lesbians aren't deserving of equal rights and equal protection, then buddy...you are in the wrong town. Go on make those arguments. I dare you.

The fascist state's goal secular and to replace worship of god with worship of the state (which incidentally liberals seem to do.)

The goal of the fascist state is to replace the rule of a representitive majority with that of a powerful entrenched few which are clustered around a figure head which may be the focus of a cult of personality which may be secular (Ronald Reagan) religious (Ayatollah Komenei) or military in nature (Col. Mommar Khadafi.)

Point to where the private market works? How about cheap powerful computer you're using that was developed by a couple of guys in their garages using a OS that was developed by another couple of guys in their garages.

Which is made in a foreign nation for pennies on the dollar in return for the patent information, so that nation can make their own and drown us with cheap imports while our factories remain closed and our workers unemployed. Brilliant.

Who wants to strip Muslims of their first amendment rights? Prove it? If you mean stopping the spread of sharia law, I think we can all agree on that.

Uh-huh. [Hey Jimbo! Hooked another one! Yee-HAW! Look at the head on THAT one! Yep, Sharia law, get's em every time!] Evangelicals and fundamentalists are a FAR graver threat to American freedom and liberty. I don't even need to ask where you stood on the Ground Zero Mosque issue.

No one has had their first amendment rights trampled on than Christians and Jews. Despite their claims that Islam is a religion of peace, politicians are very afraid to offend Muslims in any way.

Freedom OF doesn't mean freedom FROM religion is that right? Are you saying that it would trample the 1st Amendment rights of pastor bastard to be prevented from burning Korans and putting Americans overeas and at home in grave risk of future terrorist attacks in reprisal? Is his first amendment right more important than NOT causing an international incident that put us all at risk. But hey, it really gives the War of Civilizations narrative that serve the Christofascists and nationalists favor a real leg up, don't it?

No don't get you get it DQ? You can't link anything to cite as evidence against him because he only wants to hear the evidence that he has read. And he can't cite that as evidence because he read it somewhere. See how it works? I don't believe we ever landed on the moon because I wasn't there to land on the moon so unless you can give me evidence that I was there it never happened. I don't have to correct my assumptions because I know what happened to me. Oy vey. And no I don't care to take him apart line by line because at this point eap is going around in a circle (and has been). Like I said I believe eap is hatey. I am standing on that assertion.

Hatey always had a soft spot for you, though that may have changed. Absolutely no evidence of black nationism, or much mania for the abortion issue that we saw with hatey. Nor, and most telling, any out right and specific blame for the democrats as a party. But on the other hand, this merry-go-round Does look mighty familiar. Christ. Are MY brains turning to mush? Different paint job and fixtures, but still basically the same ride. How long could this have gone on and I not notice? Scary. Mouser, I owe you one. One what? I haven't a clue, but you earned it, whatever it is.

Well Hatey was never a jerk to me, you're right. but he may have gotten upset when i said I was frustrated about his merry-go-round arguments. I wasn't trying to be a jerk when I said it I was just frustrated. However he got banned before we ever had another exchange and before I could explain my outburst to him. So he may have a chip on his shoulder regarding it. Of course perhaps it's just the way certain people think that tend to blog and lean right. Maybe the thought patterns are similar which leads to similar political beliefs. I would argue that said phenomenon certainly exists among liberals.

Aye. Strong argument for culture and shared values. It helps when you don't have to ask what color a cloudless sky at noon is. Online, it is a mistake to assume it is always blue.

Gee, I'm jealous, because I thought hatey always had a soft spot for ME! To find out he's two-timing on me really hurts. How can I ever forget how he showed his affection for me by calling me a communist, a socialist, a Taliban-loving terrorist sympathizer? And to top it off, he then accused me of molesting my daughters. Now THAT is when you truly know he cares about you.

I put eap on ignore a few days ago, but in reading your responses to him, it's evident he's still as much an instigator as ever. I really don't miss reading his drivel.

Why am I even bothering at this point? I just caught the two of you as liars. Why can anything that you say be trusted now?

Don, you still don't know what fascism is so I'd rather wait until you actually do some research before we continue to argue on this. You won't even acknowledge the most basic fact that it was "invented" in the 20th century. So, you want evidence of revisionist history, there it is.

So I proved to you the free market works and you throw out a red herring. Isn't that what you were accusing me of doing? The fact you can even attempt to argue against this shows that you have no business experience and no economics education.

Prove that evangelicals and fundamentalists are a greater threat than Muslims. You can't can you?

Yes, preventing that pastor from burning a Koran is trampling on his first amendment rights. If you believe otherwise then you don't believe in the first amendment. Why do you care anyway? Why are you so focused on history? Isn't that what you asked me?

Is his first amendment right more important than NOT causing an international incident that put us all at risk.

Are you justifying the patriot act? Wow, you really don't know where you stand on anything do you?

By the way, I look forward to the both of you commenting on Ed Shultz calling Laura Ingram a slut. How would you feel if I called Rachel Maddow a slut?

I'm off the merry-go-round.

Excellent choice, Don. Let him blather to himself, which he probably does at home all the time. I don't even bother to see what he is saying, as it simply isn't worth the click of the mouse.

Glad to see you surrender.

It must be really annoying get caught lying and being a hypocrite.

Republicans believe in socialism/welfare, but only for business and defense department contractors.

Tax-cut welfare for the rich!

Small government=big socialist military!

Some information in the above got erased .....Sorry, but you will get the point.

He means cut benefits for everyone and give the money to the rich, the assumption being "spending" consists of the wages of hard-working Americans being taxed and handed to a bunch of Cadillac-driving welfare queens.

The reality is "spending" consists of handing the money earned by hard-working Americans to a bunch of Cadillac-driving investment-class queens.

The rich pay Gingrich handsomely to come up with specious arguments for cutting benefits for "the People" and handing cash to the rich.

The national debt would be a lot lower if all the Bush tax cuts were repealed. Obama is just as culpable as Bush in that regard. The Bush tax cuts are now the Obama tax cuts. Obama did as well as any sniveling Republican in promising to cut taxes.

Anyone who promises tax cuts deserves a slap in the face.

Obama has been equally cowardly in standing up to military spending.