Terri Schiavo: Please explain something to me...

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Sugar

Well I can tell you what the conservative columnist at my paper said today about her being blind while we were watching the news conference:

"OH. So are we going to believe a bunch of guys in white coats or are we going to believe our eyes. (referring to that he "saw" her watching the balloon on that video tape).

And people complain about the blindness of the Clinton-faithful.

What gets me is that few moments we saw on that tape was part of hours of them trying to elicit a response to no avail. That was nothing more than them seeing her eyes moving and then moving the balloon in time with her eyes.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by sparky

Fat chance. They could be firing up the ovens and most people wouldn't say a thing. Anyone who disagrees with the Republican Taliban basically gets muzzled and shut down. I don't know what it's gonna take, but it is going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

Precisely what I've been saying. Bush's popularity is down? Big deal. His popularity was at the same level when he supposedly "won" the election, it made no difference. Anyone who thinks the tide is actually turning this early on in the game is delusional.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by GypsySorcerer

On the condition I don't have to host any tea parties.

And that you don't have to look perpetually constipated and Stepford-ish like Miss Laura.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

Precisely what I've been saying. Bush's popularity is down? Big deal. His popularity was at the same level when he supposedly "won" the election, it made no difference. Anyone who thinks the tide is actually turning this early on in the game is delusional.

I think if the opposition gets a candidate who is not scared to take on W instead of playing into Rove's every move, W will go down hard. Again, it was Kerry's election to lose and he lost it that way, which says nothing favorable about W's declining popularity.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

and two wrongs make a right?

And we should continue to allow the rich to keep screwing everyone else who isn't as "fortunate" as them? I can ask them politely to please remove their d*cks from our collectives asses, but it ain't going to do any good, is it?

[The Tower]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

That is currently defined as 200,000 per year per household.

I ain't there, my dear. It would be nice, but I ain't there.

and two wrongs make a right?

I don't think that a progressive tax is a wrong.

If Joe Blow's yearly income is $50,000 with a 10% tax rate, the gov't gets $5,000 and Joe Blow gets $45,000. If John Smith's yearly income is $500,000 with a 30% tax rate, the gov't gets $150,000 and John Smith gets $350,000.

Living on $350,000 a year is a hell of a lot easier than living on $45,000 a year.

I pay a HUGE percent of my money to the government for all the various taxes. I would be willing to pay even more if the government would actually do some good with that money. Affordable health care and fighting the prescription drug companies would be a nice place to start.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Again, it was Kerry's election to lose and he lost it that way

Oy. Where is that little violin?

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by The Tower

If Joe Blow's yearly income is $50,000 with a 10% tax rate, the gov't gets $5,000 and Joe Blow gets $45,000. If John Smith's yearly income is $500,000 with a 30% tax rate, the gov't gets $150,000 and John Smith gets $350,000.

Living on $350,000 a year is a hell of a lot easier than living on $45,000 a year.

Perhaps true, but that does not address my issue which is no one at all should ever have to pay 30% to any govt. and I mean 30% total (FICA, medicare, state, income, etc.) That is just assinine and promotes govt. waste, which brings me to:

Originally Posted by The Tower

I would be willing to pay even more if the government would actually do some good with that money. Affordable health care and fighting the prescription drug companies would be a nice place to start.

Who wouldn't. But that is never gonna happen until they have less money to piss away

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

Oy. Where is that little violin?

W was beatable and in fact Kerry almost beat him, fraud aside Imagine what a stronger candidate might have done.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

And we should continue to allow the rich to keep screwing everyone else who isn't as "fortunate" as them? I can ask them politely to please remove their d*cks from our collectives asses, but it ain't going to do any good, is it?

We should do neither is what I am saying. But, you apparently think it is okay to screw the rich but not the poor. How is that fair?

[Sugar]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

What gets me is that few moments we saw on that tape was part of hours of them trying to elicit a response to no avail. That was nothing more than them seeing her eyes moving and then moving the balloon in time with her eyes.

But they will cling to any shred with a white-knuckle grip. It's like if they admit they were wrong on anything, any one thing, the whole house of cards will fall. It's how this administration does business.

When the fall comes, it's gonna be big...

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by Sugar

But they will cling to any shred with a white-knuckle grip. It's like if they admit they were wrong on anything, any one thing, the whole house of cards will fall. It's how this administration does business.

When the fall comes, it's gonna be big...

ITA

thankfully, I think it is on its way

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

We should do neither is what I am saying. But, you apparently think it is okay to screw the rich but not the poor. How is that fair?

They've screwed over the poor all this time, maybe it would be sweet justice for them to finally get hit where it hurts: in their wallets. This country is all about the wealthy making money off the backs of the poor and then using that money to keep the poor impoverished so that they can continue to build and keep their wealth. To be perfectly frank, I don't give two squirts of duck **** if Mr. Moneybags has to pay even more taxes than he already does because, in the end, he's not going to be scrounging dumpsters for food or worrying about how he's going to feed his three kids based simply on his minimum wage paycheck. He's no going to worry about not having proper healthcare. Call it unfair, it probably is. But I could care less.

I make lots of money, more than I should, and I pay lots of taxes. Not as much as I probably should and I wouldn't be opposed to paying more. I don't need all the cash I get.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by dissention

They've screwed over the poor all this time, maybe it would be sweet justice for them to finally get hit where it hurts: in their wallets. This country is all about the wealthy making money off the backs of the poor and then using that money to keep the poor impoverished so that they can continue to build and keep their wealth. To be perfectly frank, I don't give two squirts of duck **** if Mr. Moneybags has to pay even more taxes than he already does because, in the end, he's not going to be scrounging dumpsters for food or worrying about how he's going to feed his three kids based simply on his minimum wage paycheck. He's no going to worry about not having proper healthcare. Call it unfair, it probably is. But I could care less.

I think that revenge never works and in the end makes people suffer needlessly. I also think that kind of screw them attitude from both sides is what got us in this mess. but, it will never end I guess.

[Sugar]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

ITA

thankfully, I think it is on its way

God I hope so.

If only it didn't feel so much like trying to turn a 1966 Cadillac around on a skinny little one-way street.