1 - 10 Next
Wow. Talk about stupid comments. You approve, apparently, of despicable tactics of terrorism? Or is it that you're a domestic terrorist yourself and decided you want to show your approval of your brethren?
In response to:

Obama's Bain Attacks Could Backfire

Paul408 Wrote: May 29, 2012 4:07 PM
My sister was told that now that ObamaCare passed, that she could get insurance. So, she tried to get the insurance, and because the way ObamaCare is written, she was told that she could pay $4200 per month for insurance or they would turn her into the IRS and when the fines started for not carrying insurance, she'd be fined 600/month. So, she gave up on the system, didn't get insurance, which, if ObamaCare hadn't passed, the same company that offered insurance for pre-existing conditions and catastrophic coverage would have given her a rate of nearly 2000 a month, which she would have taken. And then she would have been able to see the doctor when her stomach started hurting. And now, she has stage 4 ovarian cancer that went untreated.
In response to:

Obama's Bain Attacks Could Backfire

Paul408 Wrote: May 29, 2012 4:03 PM
And to add to it, if you look at the reality of it, W was "credited" with the increase by liberal liar economists who claim that because he wasn't in office until 2009, the 2009 numbers, which would have been in W's budget in September would have been in effect. In reality, the delay on passing a budget and just operating on continuing resolutions happened and the 2009 budget was actually Obama's as it was passed several months into his time in office, with roughly 600 billion more than W asked for. So, the whole thing was a lie perpetrated by the left to convince people what they know, that Obama is a profligate spender isn't true somehow. And you either fell for it, or flat-out know it's a lie and decided to propagate it further.
In response to:

Obama's Bain Attacks Could Backfire

Paul408 Wrote: May 29, 2012 4:00 PM
The fact is that in 1912, the taxes on the rich were much lower than they are today. They were 0. So, your first "fact" is a lie. The second, W had a 1 off spending increase, TARP which we shouldn't have had, but did. So, 900 billion of that was a one-off. Without TARP, W falls below 5% increase. Obama KEPT the spending levels at the one-off level, which means the emergency spending level was increased 1.8%. If he actually took responsibility for what he did, he's over 5%.
If you considered that "graciously", then I would hate to see what you consider a temper tantrum. My 2 year old son has less of a temper tantrum than Algore did.
In response to:

Obama - Shrinking Government Easy as Pie

Paul408 Wrote: May 21, 2012 11:37 AM
I have a buddy who is unemployed. He's been out of work for about 4 months now. I had an opportunity for him that fits his skil-set, and it was $16/hour. He said he couldn't take the pay cut from unemployment.
In response to:

Obama - Shrinking Government Easy as Pie

Paul408 Wrote: May 21, 2012 11:35 AM
Doesn't include the "job retraining" programs, of which there are over 300 now. In 2009, the number he was so desperately searching for (and I'm sure it's gone down significantly now) was $.126. In other words, of every dollar you and I send to the bloated government, 12.6 cents would get to the actual recepient. There was a total of 87.4% overhead. If a charity organization gets to the 50% mark, they're declared a fraudulent organization by their state's attorney generals. And yet, our governemnt throws so much money away..... In the 1990's the federal government took over a "house of ill repute" and operated it for a few years. Then it failed. If they can't run a brothel, how can they be trusted to run anything else?
In response to:

Has the Bell Begun to Toll for the GOP?

Paul408 Wrote: May 18, 2012 10:07 AM
I'm going to ask you a simple question. Progress means you're heading somewhere. Progress to WHERE exactly? Freedom is dying on the vine, folks, and so, the idiot posting for his favorite communist, who can't bother to articulate an argument, so he just tries to be as offensive as he can be, hurt this process more and more. You are a racist and hateful person who seems to think that calling us "tea baggers" will win people over to your argument. When you use that phrase, all you show is you don't have any substance behind your argument, so you have to result to name calling. Either that or you're just too lazy to come up with your own arguments.
In response to:

The Old Rubber Cross

Paul408 Wrote: Apr 30, 2012 9:39 AM
My Grandmother had Parkinson's and so often would get her words mixed up. Things like "Fancyland at Dizzyworld." And petting the "dalkens" at SeaWorld. She knew what she was saying wasn't right, but couldn't stop it, so we just laughed with it. One of the best ones was when she said that her cousin was living in a condom on the beach. My mother nearly lost it when she heard that one.
In response to:

Glee Celebrates the 'T'

Paul408 Wrote: Apr 27, 2012 9:38 AM
Great. The scumbag spammer has shown back up. I guess it's time to get ready to flag comments on each thread.
1 - 10 Next