Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Login | What's Hot
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons

Comment on: Heartland Patriot

Marxism By Other Means

97 Comments
Tuesday, July, 31, 2007 9:44 PM Jimmy Carter writes:

Here's some thoughts:

"....and gives the spoils of this taking to those less fortunate.."

That doesn't cover those that simply do not or will earn their way.


Can You imagine Our Nation if every expenditure had to be explained first by stating under which Amendment to the Constitution it falls?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 31, 2007 10:16 PM Scottie writes:

Jimmy

I'd settle for a population that was able to pass a test on the Constitution as a requirement to receive a high school diploma.

AS for those that will not try to earn their way, they still pay taxes under the Fair Tax plan, every time they spend a dollar, they pay the tax. Illegals pay the tax. Drug Dealers pay the tax. And for those that want to live on the meager allowance for the poor, I say let them. It's what they're doing already, but their neighbors will have a stake in the system again.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 31, 2007 10:21 PM Scottie writes:

Another Thought Jimmy

I think every spending bill should include a clause that specifies the constitutional basis for the spending. Quick, somebody point to the section that authorizes Social Security?! What do you mean it's not there?!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, July, 31, 2007 10:24 PM Jimmy Carter writes:

I understand what You stated.

I was taking a shot at the term "less fortunate."

I know they would "pay taxes," but it still comes back to them in.....dare I state....."benefits."



And Yer test fer high school graduates wouldn't pass the smell test today.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, August, 01, 2007 3:12 AM BLACKTYGRRRR writes:

First steps

1) Abolish the death tax...2) ABolish the capital gains tax...it is unethical...to make that politically palatable, it can first be eliminated for those with less than $100,000 in stock.

I am contacting political bloggers around the country since I am one as well. I hope this email is not an intrusion.

If you are open to doing a link exchange, I get some pretty decent traffic.

Thank you.

eric aka http://www.blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com

Also, if you are interested, I am # 6 in the country at the bloggers choice awards in the political category.

http://www.bloggerschoiceawards.com/blogs/show/21020
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, August, 01, 2007 5:20 AM davecatbone writes:

Fair Tax

Scottie, I read the book. And, I wholeheartedly endorse it. Everybody that I give it to who reads it feels the same way. People are reluctant to big change, makes them uncomfortable. But this idea is possible. The Establishment would fight to the teeth to stop it, but what else is new? Every criticism I've heard of it arises out of false assumptions and outright lies.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, August, 01, 2007 7:29 AM Scottie writes:

Dave Cat

The more I hear about the Fair Tax, the more I like it.

I especially like that it takes away Congress' ability to dole out special favors and that it makes everyone contribute something in return for the benefits they receive from the government. When you add the possibility that the government will share the pain when they damage the economy by suffering lower revenues themselves, I'm sold. The current system is just becoming too untenable.

On the down side, with the majority of taxpayers currently paying so little of the tax burden, shifting any of it to them will result in the cries of "Tax Cuts for the Rich!"
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, August, 01, 2007 7:38 AM Scottie writes:

Black Tiger

We get it. You are the greatest self-absorbed nihlist blogging on the internet today. Thank you for gracing us with your presence here today. That you would deign to lower yourself so in your quest for self aggrandizement is truly awe inspiring. Thank you oh great one. You have truly earned the title. All hail the Schmuck!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, August, 01, 2007 10:05 AM philosophocon writes:

Been there, done that, haven't we?

All this really boils down to is a tragedy of the commons on a a national scale.

Also, be careful about your use of the word 'wealthy', because what the tax code considers wealthy and what I would consider wealthy are two very different things. In addition, as things continue to deteriorate, what level of income is considered wealthy for tax purposes will become increasingly small.

Which brings about another advantage I think the fair tax has, in that it avoids the marriage penalty that the current tax laws impose.

Of course, on the flip side of the fair tax would be a need to have 'fair', i.e. responsible and dare I hope Constitutionally valid spending by government.

The very fact that the fair tax would eat into Congress' ability to dole out special favors, either in terms of preferable tax treatment or benefits from the public treasury, is the single greatest reason it'll never happen, IMHO.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, August, 01, 2007 10:52 AM BrianR writes:

Well, the problem you outlined

was addressed by Tytler, in his observations about most democracies having a life span of about 200 years.

"When the People awaken to the fact that they can vote to themselves the largesse of the Treasuy, democracies fail".

That's, unfortunately, what's happening now and where we're at if the government fiscal interference in general doesn't change, and I don't mean just the tax structure. Entitlements, Social Security, all of it, are bringing about the Fall of the American Empire.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, August, 01, 2007 6:32 PM Scottie writes:

Philosophocon

What's fair about two percent of the taxpayers paying nearly forty percent of the taxes in this country to fund the gubmint's ability to dole out favors?

Why should the lowest forty percent of the population pay virtually no taxes while demanding food stamps, housing assistance, education for their children, Universal Health Care, and other subsidies?

Something's gotta give, it's just a matter of time.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, August, 01, 2007 6:37 PM Scottie writes:

Brian

I understand your point, but I'm not ready to roll over and accept it. This country has always been exceptional, has built itself by solving problems others could not, and is still in my opinion the most sucessful experiment in human history. And thanks to the European's willingness to actually enact the Left's ideas, we even have a fair warning of what is to come if we don't change things.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, August, 01, 2007 6:39 PM Jimmy Carter writes:

If I remember correctly,

I believe it was Alexander Hamilton who wanted a particular tax on the poor in order to encourage productivity.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, August, 01, 2007 9:57 PM Virginia Daddy writes:

I know I've quoted the book before

But, "Where's Jon Galt?".

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 7:38 AM Scottie writes:

Jimmy

Interesting concept. If you tax something, you discourage it on the one hand, but if you take money from the poor, you keep them poor on the other. Back then, I think there were debtors prisons as well, but I could be wrong. Seems to me that would be an effective motivator in its own right. But leave it to the gubmint to pile on someone when they're down.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 7:43 AM Scottie writes:

VA Dad

I believe its "Who is Jon Galt?"
Who indeed. Whoever he is, he's probably setting up trusts in Fiji, like the Kennedys, or the Sashalls like Soros.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 8:49 AM philosophocon writes:

Scottie,

I don't think there were debtor's prisons in America post-independence, at least not for long. As far as my best recollection goes, after the storming of the most famous debtor's prison, the Bastille, they went out of style rather quickly. Of course, I could be wrong.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 9:18 AM Scottie writes:

Philosophocon

You're probably correct. Isn't living in poverty punishment enough? Been there, done that, don't want a repeat. Poverty is the natural feedback we receive for our poor decisions in life. As they say, poor folks have poor ways. While I have compassion for those that meet misfortune, I feel no compelling need to rush in and make it all better for them. All of us must face our struggles in life, and in overcoming, we become wiser.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 11:05 AM The Crawfish writes:

Constitutionality, etc

The requirement to directly annotate Constitutionality on every bit of spending...actually every bit of spending, regulation, legislation...everything that comes outta Congress is sumthin President Crawfish would immediately demand. I'd also demand that every bill that came to my desk would be a 'clean' bill. The only amendments that would be allowed would be those that DIRECTLY correlated with the meat of the bill. Anything else would get a public veto, preferrably during a televised address to the peeps.

Fair Tax....the best plan put forth in the past 150 years.

Social Insecurity...my plan is somewhere in the posts of the Swamp, I think. I'd eliminate it in just a few years for those who ain't already drawing benefits, with full refunds including interest from the date the gummint stole your money in the first place.

Welfare, public housing, etc....unless the person is mentally and physically unable to support themself (mentally unable only refers to retardation or brain damage, not the wimpy mental illness claims)...NO!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 12:20 PM Virginia Daddy writes:

Ooops.

That's, uh, what I meant to say...

You got my point, though...

Yeah, the trouble starts subtly, as Hank and Dagny found out...
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 12:26 PM JDW writes:

Scottie :

Thomas Jefferson

It must be observed that our revenues are raised almost wholly on imported goods.


Alexander Hamilton

It is a singular advantage of taxes on articles of consumption that they contain in their own nature a security against excess. They prescribe their own limit, which cannot be exceeded without defeating the end purposed - that is, an extension of the revenue.

Alexander Hamilton

It is evident from the state of the country, from the habits of the people, from the experience we have had on the point itself, that it is impracticable to raise any very considerable sums by direct taxation.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 4:31 PM wil writes:

I have converted

from a flat tax advocate to a fair (consumption) tax advocate. I forget who (it was one of you regulars) discussed the fair tax with me a few months ago and after reading more, convinced me it was the best idea. As JDW quotes attest, the founders would be appalled by an income tax.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 4:34 PM wil writes:

By the way

The communist manifesto also calls for universal public education. Just a thought.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 5:11 PM davecatbone writes:

JDW

Very topical quotes. I'm currently reading American Sphinx about Jefferson. The Fair Tax is the way to go, and guess what, the rich will pay more money in taxes. You'd think that would please the Libs.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 6:17 PM Scottie writes:

Run Crawfish Run!

You already got my vote. I wonder how long before we have a Constitutionalist party? And perhaps a Supreme court that respects the Original language and intent of the Constitution as well.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 6:19 PM Scottie writes:

JDW

Good to see you here in the Heartland. Thanks for the quotes, I collect them. If you are interested in some more good quotes, check out Fletch's blog; he's got two long posts with lots of quotes.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 6:22 PM Scottie writes:

Wil

if they repeal the sixteenth ammendment and install the fair tax, I'd be all for it. My worst nightmare is to get a national sales tax and still have the income tax in effect.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 6:25 PM Scottie writes:

Wil

Universal public education was the means to indoctrinate the next generation with political propaganda to keep the masses under control.

That could never happen here! If it did, we'd be teaching kids about sex in kindergarden, and scaring the bejezeus out of them on Global Warming, and . . . (Cue Emily Latella)

Never Mind.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 6:29 PM Scottie writes:

Dave Cat

It isn't about more money with the Libs, it's about more control. Every time we cut taxes, government revenues go up. But every time the Libs are in control, the first thing they want to do is raise taxes. It's not more money, or the libs would advocate cutting taxes too. It's about more control and keeping constituencies divided against each other in order to perpetuate their power over others. This is usually done under the guise of being "For their own good".
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 6:30 PM Scottie writes:

VA Dad

"I sure did get your point", he said with a shrug.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 8:00 PM Scottie writes:

This Story Breaks My Heart.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070802/ap_on_re_us/marines_iraq_shooting;_ylt=AriltkRcJdRckMPvQuRpRb5vzwcF
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 9:45 PM Virginia Daddy writes:

Scottie

:)

How's things in Terre Haute?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 10:23 PM Scottie writes:

VA Dad

It's August in the Heartland. Hot, muggy, and very green and lush.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 10:29 PM mgraves writes:

Scottie

Tuesday, July, 31, 2007 10:17 PM

Absolutely. How about a citizenship exam requirement to receive a H.S. diploma or GED?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 02, 2007 10:52 PM Scottie writes:

MGraves

I remember it being a requirement back when I was in HS in the early seventies. You had to have civics and pass a test on the constitution back then to graduate. I don't see why kids don't today.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, August, 03, 2007 7:51 AM The Crawfish writes:

Speaking of citizenship exams...

For one to become a citizen, President Crawfish would raise the difficulty of the citizenship exam and make the English proficiency standard much higher as well.

That brings me to one of my big rant subjects. Why do we have voting ballots in languages other than English? Its a requirement to know English to be a citizen, and you must be a citizen to vote (at least until Hitlery, Red Nanny, Land Deal, etc gain total power), and campaigns are run in English, so someone who doesn't understand English has no clue as to the issues and candidates, so....they should not be voting! President Crawfish would mandate that all business of the federal government be conducted in English. The only exceptions would be when dealing with foreign entities (gov'ts, companies, etc), tourism, and immigration. Anything else, all the forms, paperwork, web sites, etc, in English only. Why do state drivers license bureaus have more signs and forms in mezzican than English? Are the signs on the road in mezzican? NO! No English, no license. Don't like it? Go back to the crrraphole country you came from.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, August, 03, 2007 9:37 AM davecatbone writes:

Crawfish

I'm with you on that, there should be no option except assimilation. Resistance should be futile. If you want to live here, be Americans, one and all.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, August, 03, 2007 10:19 AM Scottie writes:

A One Hundred Year Old Idea

"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

Theodore Roosevelt 1907
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, August, 03, 2007 10:50 AM BrianR writes:

Scottie, re your last post to me

I understand, and obviously hope you're right, but I'm not sanguine.

Don't forget, half the country looks at Europe, and thinks what they see is GOOD.

Also, don't forget. When the Roman Empire was falling, the people weren't all standing around saying "Wow, it sucks that the Empire's falling!"

These things are only defined from historical perspective, not while one's actually living in the middle of it.

Unless some very dramatic steps are taken to reverse the trends, we're in a boatload of shiite, and if California's an example of what lies ahead, buy gold, a GPS, and PVC piping to bury your guns.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, August, 03, 2007 11:29 AM Scottie writes:

Brian

Can't afford any gold, buy I've got the PVC Pipe, a good post hole digger, and plenty of ammo.

Remember back in 04 when GWB was reelected and we increased our margins in both houses of congress there wss talk of the Democratice party being done for. Well, I still think it is, we are simply watching the death throes of the leviathan as it twitches and struggles to survive. The Dems are so far left, they're off the map. I don't see how they come back after the primaries and plausibly deny their statements during the primaries.

This nation has never before elected a party that ran on a platform of higher taxes and weak national defense in time of war, and I don't think that's changed. If it has, we will be comisserating in November 08 and digging post holes in our respective locations. Until then, I'm losing sleep. Cheer up bro, this is America; anything can happen here; even a resurgence of common sense.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, August, 03, 2007 11:31 AM Scottie writes:

Correction

I'm NOT losing sleep.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, August, 03, 2007 11:32 AM philosophocon writes:

Scottie's worst nightmare

is my reality. Let me share with you the type of progressive progress that might well be coming your way.

Consumption taxes: 7% federal and 7% provincial, 14% total.

Income taxes: both federal and provincial progressive income taxes, with a special provincial surtax to help prop up our socialized healthcare system. But don't worry, the surtax is only applied to those 'wealthy' citizens with incomes exceeding $Cdn 65k.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, August, 03, 2007 11:41 AM Scottie writes:

Philosophocon

The first income tax was only on the truly wealthy and was only 3% of net income. It was passed as a tax "on the evil rich". As Dr. Phil says, "How's that working for you?" There can be no Fair Tax without repeal of the sixteenth ammendment. To do so would be madness.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, August, 03, 2007 11:52 AM BrianR writes:

Well, Scottie and Philosoph

Gotta say, P's post makes a lot of sense, and I hope you're right, Scottie, but as I said, I'm not sanguine.

A large part of the problem is what I've been banging my drum about: the GOP's failure to stand for anything. There's no push back against the leftward slide; it's only a matter of how fast we get there.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, August, 03, 2007 1:50 PM Scottie writes:

Brian

We really don't need to push back. The Dems are self-destructing before our eyes. The top presidential candidates are all going to the DailyKos convention, in their "debates" they don't even mention the GWOT, they are heavily invested in defeatist policies in Iraq and the Middle East in general, they openly advocate raising taxes, they are again advocating a health care policy that was soundly rejected by the public not that long ago, and the Pubs have a serious cash on hand advantage going into the primaries. We must be careful not to push them in this misguided agenda. In doing so, we ratchet ourselves to the Left and risk falling off of the cliff they are thundering towards.

What has you so concerned in my opinion is that the Republicans have such an embarassment of targets that they are wandering around somewhat aimlessly at the moment. The Pubs are getting so many breaks so fast that they haven't been able to formulate a coherent strategy to capitalize on them yet. Once we have an actual candidate next February, and the whole team in on the same page (except for McCain of course), things will gel in our favor. Once we have a concrete target to attack, be it Hillary, Edwards, or please God, Obama, you will see the political gloves come off. I think it'll be Fred Thompson and Hillary, and Hillary will get the short end of the stick in the exchange.

Be of good cheer my friend. Don't contemplate defeat at the penultimate hour. Leave that to the Dems. Chin up and be of stout heart. We haven't begun to fight; and when we do, we will prevail. Because we are right, our cause is just, and the American people are way more conservative than you believe. The entire baby boom is in late middle age. Twenty and not liberal = no heart; fifty and still liberal = no brains.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, August, 03, 2007 11:54 PM Sheila writes:

Scottie

If anyone has a brain they will listen when Shrill talks about taking our money and "investing it" in the causes she believes in...talk about Marxist and proud of it.

I think you're right Scottie...people are listening to these dolts and I think are realizing they can say good by to our democracy and hello to a marxist regime if the lefitst fanatics get total power.

I think people are waking up to the reality of the prospects of such a fate for our country.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, August, 04, 2007 12:03 AM Sheila writes:

And btw,Scottie

I like the idea of a consumption tax instead of the income tax...
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, August, 04, 2007 7:04 AM Nee writes:

I heard a rumor...

Nah, jsut kidding. But, I am for the fair tax as well. Consumption might just decrease among those who shouldn't be driving 50k cars while the kids have no healthcare...ya think?
And, Chris, yes indeed, the Constitution should be the Law of the land.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, August, 04, 2007 10:37 AM ch47 jockey writes:

Sadly I don't see the fair tax being

implemented without keeping the income tax as well,shy of an all out rebellion by the citizens.With the lack of education and common sense shown by many of our more "altruistic" countrymen it wouldn't be fair to those who don't care to better themselves or continually make bad decisions like the giant plasma TV or the gold chain instead of education or investment. In an odd way I get the feeling that the libs have the feeling that they are helping these people when they make a wrong turn into a downtrodden area,thinking "if it wasn't for our vote those evil conservatives would be making these people have to earn a living". I still recall the disgust I felt while visiting a friend who did tax returns,and he showed me a return where the refund was larger than the total earnings for the year...."the shocking thing is the person recieving the refund was extremely proud of this...with this mindset amongst the uneducated it will be amazing if the fair tax would be put into place as a replacement for the current communist progressive income tax. Keep to the shade as much as you can,enjoy the weekend
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, August, 04, 2007 2:15 PM Scottie writes:

Sheila

Let's keep feeding the Libs more rope. Eventually they will hang themselves with it.

Sooner or later, the common man will make the connection: "If they can take it from them (big oil, big tobacco, big business), then what prevents them from doing the same to me when it suits them?"

“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened.” -- Norman Thomas
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, August, 04, 2007 9:32 PM Scottie writes:

Chopper Man

Quit being a nattering nabob of negativism. I think the growing power of a connected public is going to result in a paradigm shift of biblical proportions. All new bills will soon be posted before they become law, and the grassroots/netroots will finally get a chance to find out what is going on and have some input. Look what happend to the stealth campaign by OSHA to close down sporting goods stores, look at what happened to the immigration bill. It's gonna be a brave new world for democracy in this great republic. Just watch it happen before your eyes.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, August, 04, 2007 9:37 PM Scottie writes:

Nee

It's not the spending, but the idea that if you save money and invest it, you won't be penalized for doing so. You only pay taxes on money you decide to consume. And with every transaction, you are reminded just how much money the gubmint is taking from you. And EVERYONE will have a stake in the operating costs of this country, not a demonized few at the top. Maybe if everyone faces the same burden, the current comfort with the level of taxation will diminish. Now everyone wants this program or that, but only because someone else is actually paying for it.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, August, 05, 2007 9:01 AM Nee writes:

Exactly

Scottie, RIGHT ON!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, August, 05, 2007 7:31 PM jevica writes:

Scottie

Went to the Fair Tax web site it's interesting, but without the REPEAL of the 16th Amendment it's just more tax upon tax.

If the "Fair Tax" bill was passed it would do nothing to repeal the 16th amendment. This would take a separate resolution, which has been introduced, H. J. RES. 16 in the 109th Congress, would take 3/4th of the states with a time limit of 7 years to pass.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, August, 05, 2007 10:03 PM Scottie writes:

Jev

I understand the process, and I agree that without repealing the sixteenth ammendment, there is no way I would support an ADDITIONAL consumption tax. Doing so would negate most of the reasons for supporting the Fair Tax in the first place.

How to you rally the people to support the repeal. ABOLISH THE IRS! That should do it. That is the inevitable downside to embuing an agency with a Darth Vader contenance.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, August, 05, 2007 10:42 PM jevica writes:

Scottie

I figured you did, was more a comment to those that might not.

More like eliminate the income tax. You would still need a collection agency to oversee the national sales tax of this plan, no matter what you want to call it.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, August, 06, 2007 7:23 AM Scottie writes:

Jevica

Actually, the collection would be delegated to the state agencies that already collect sales taxes. I think 43 states already collect sales taxes, and they would just collect the federal portion and forward it to the treasury. The other seven would have to create one.

How many times does the Federal government threaten to withhold funds from the states? Remember if they wouldn't enforce seat belt laws, the feds threatened to withhold federal highway funds. Seems like the states could respond tit-for-tat by withholding the collections going the other way if the Fair Tax was enacted.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, August, 06, 2007 3:09 PM jevica writes:

Scottie

Not quite, seems like there will still be a federal bureau of some sort. Information I have found. If the states started that don't you think that the federals would change collection real quick?

"According to The Fair Tax Act of 2005:

"There shall be in the Department of the Treasury a Sales Tax Bureau to administer the national sales tax in those States where it is required pursuant to section 404, and to discharge other Federal duties and powers relating to the national sales tax (including those required by sections 402, 403, and 405). The Office of Revenue Allocation shall be within the Sales Tax Bureau."

"Title II, chapter six, section 603 of The Fair Tax Act sets up the Problem Resolution Office and authorizes "problem resolution officers." There will still be tax courts according to title II, chapter six, section 602 and chapter nine, section 7451. Changing the phrase "Internal Revenue Service" to "Department of the Treasury" and "Commissioner of Internal Revenue" to "Secretary" doesn't eliminate the federal bureaucracy."
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, August, 06, 2007 8:42 PM Scottie writes:

Jevica

The IRS is part of the Dept of Treasury already. The real gain is fewer payers since the businesses collecting the tax would be far far fewer than individual payers. Also, most busineses have a deeper understanding and staff to handle the regulatory burden, which is very similar to the sales taxes they already account for. Individuals would no longer file tax returns, but busineses still would.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, August, 06, 2007 10:05 PM marie writes:

I have been a supporter of a Flat tax,

but, upon reading am considering a Fair tax -

Now, please explain why you think ONE politician (Republican or not) will ever give up control.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, August, 06, 2007 10:59 PM Scottie writes:

Marie

That's easy, 'cause we have the vote. Ultimately THEY don't have the power, WE do!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, August, 06, 2007 11:09 PM marie writes:

I honestly hope you're right Scottie,

but come November - and you've got a ballot/vote (on a PAPERLESS MACHINE!!!!) what choices will there be?

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, August, 06, 2007 11:43 PM jevica writes:

marie

About voting on paperless machine, the optical scan machines seem to be the best. "There is paper-trail legislation pending in a dozen more states."

"Today, 27 states have paper trail laws, including 6 of the 10 largest states (California, New York, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan and New Jersey). Eight more states use paper trails statewide, though they are not legally required to.

Another sign of the success of the reform movement: jurisdictions that adopted paperless touch-screen voting are beginning to abandon it."

Article is here
http://www.verifiedvotingfoundation.org/article.php?id=6430
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, August, 06, 2007 11:49 PM Scottie writes:

Marie

If you can tell me what will be on the ballot, I can tell you how I'll vote. Until then, it's all mental just masturbation. The elections are over a year away yet. Right now, I'm focused on the primaries.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, August, 06, 2007 11:52 PM Scottie writes:

Jevica

I noticed a startling absence of "voting irregularities" during the last election cycle. Seems to only happen when the Pubs win for some reason. Same equipment, same ballots, same stupid voters, same everything except the result. Kinda curious, No?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, August, 07, 2007 12:04 AM jevica writes:

Scottie

After reading your comment twice, I did not understand it exactly the first time, and if I do now, is your question is rhetoric? If not no it's not because those trouble making fools that believe Bush stole 2000 and 2004 elections are quiet when they win.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, August, 07, 2007 1:06 AM marie writes:

Jevica and Scottie

I agree that optical scan would be the best - but, they were yanked out of Maryland.

Here in TX, there was a recent local election in re. a 'tax increase' for the FD/EMTs - I called before I voted for an explanation and was told it was because of the new development in the county (NOT subsidized housing - but, large homes on ranchets!?), seems like the the property taxes on these new ranchets(renchettes?) should have covered any additional costs- no one got back to me.

Oh, I got distracted - I showed up to vote and for the first time encountered Diebold - the paperless, auditless, copyright protected voting machine!

I will now request an absentee ballot.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, August, 07, 2007 8:01 AM Scottie writes:

Marie

Can you name any system that is absolutely bullet-prrof and impervious to manipulation? Seems to me the ATM system works pretty well for us every day with a very miniscule error rate. If you think people will scam the system for votes, how much more determined are they when it comes to cash?

No politician wants to be illegitimized by a ballot scandal, especially when information can circle the globe in minutes. All of the "voting scandals" I've seen have been overblown attempts by the Left to portray the situation as something it is not. I have faith in the system; it's the government itself that I'm losing faith in.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, August, 07, 2007 8:12 AM Scottie writes:

Doc Steech

That's the rub isn't it? He swoops in, drops his little bag of self-promotion and off he goes, never to return.

His latest iteration is to compose an inane sentence or two masquerading as a comment followed closely by two paragraphs of self-serving dribble.

If you click on his name and go to his TH blog, you will find not a single link on his blog roll and less than six hundered hits. On his other blog site, you will find a blog roll so vast as to have no value at all. The odds of generating traffic from his bloated blog roll there are so minisule they're non-existent.

The shame is, he's a pretty good writer and obviously intelligent. I'd like to see him engage in the conversation. I'm sure he would be a welcome addition to the crowd. But his self-promotion to the exclusion of all else renders him nothing but a pest.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, August, 07, 2007 8:27 AM Scottie writes:

Jevica

Let me rephrase, counsellor. There never seem to be voting irregularities when the Democrats win, only when the Democrats lose.

BTW: The NY Times, no Republican tool, eventually performed an independent recount of Florida's ballots and certified the election for Bush in '04. The meme that GWB "stole" the election has been thoroughly debunked, yet it lives on in many circles on the Left.

Also, not one single "disenfranchised black voter" out of the alledged thousands has ever stepped forward and made that case either.

Given this hysteria, I largely discount unproven allegations of voter fraud, especially from the Left. The voting machines aren't the problem, it's the uninformed, uneducated, emotional electorate.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, August, 07, 2007 9:33 AM jevica writes:

Scottie

Yes, right on.

My brother-in-law still believes and ALWAYS will in the Bush stole them both theory. No matter how much proof I come up with to show him, etc. it never matters.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, August, 07, 2007 11:23 AM marie writes:

Scottie

An ATM gives a paper receipt, the machines are auditable.

I cannot get a paper ballot. If the power goes out no voting. An optical scanner covers both those conditions. I do not have faith in a 'trust us' system with no back-up.

I have NOT said anything about the 2000-2004 elections. These machines have been forced on me and that's all that I'm griping about.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, August, 07, 2007 12:50 PM Scottie writes:

Marie

Are you satisfied with the fairness and results of the election you voted in with these machines or are you questioning the result? In other words, are you railing against an actual problem or just a potential one?

Secondly, that you make the assertion that there is no backup and the system is unauditable doesn't necessarily make it so. Do you have an engineering background in Diebold machines? How do you know there is no backup? How do you know there is no audit trail? How often does the power go out on election day where you come from?

When you vote using punchcards, what piece of paper do you get to take with you? In my experience, none. If the Diebold machine spits out a piece of paper, and you have to turn it in, how does that protect the integrity of the election? The election officials could just as easily manipulate the paper spit from the Diebold machines as they could a punchcard, couldn't they?

You use online banking and your computer doesn't spit out any paper, yet there is still a record of the transaction and a paper trail. The transactions are still auditable; witness the month end statement you receive. How often is the statement wrong?

Sorry Marie, but your resistance to change and new technology is ironic given the forum we are exchanging these ideas on.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, August, 07, 2007 12:53 PM Scottie writes:

Jevica

Like Larry Elder says, "Facts are like Kryptonite to a toe-tag liberal."
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, August, 07, 2007 1:06 PM marie writes:

scottie,

LOL - I like change, but am familiar enough with computers that I know a receipt with my selections is safest. I've never used 'punch cards' - the scanner that was used in Md. was similar to those fill in the circle tests taken long ago, the filled in sheet was fed into the scanner and the paper ballot went into a secure box.

My computer will print whatever transaction I want. If the Diebold machine printed my choices I'd be satisfied.

I've only voted once on the new Diebold, it was on simply a tax increase.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, August, 07, 2007 3:24 PM Scottie writes:

Marie

This is much hand wringing about nothing. There are rudundancies built into every computer system. The tallies will be on board, recorded in a database. The database will be transmitted to an offsite collection node that will aggregate them. The checksums of both will have to agree or the batch will be called for a resend. When the power drops out when I'm using Quickbooks, all the transactions that have been recorded are still there. The only thing I've ever found missing is a transaction that was dropped before it could be recorded.

That you can print every transaction doesn't mean that you do. And if you wanted to, you could print every tranaction that has occured for the past three months. But you don't; because it is unnecessary. I too know a little something about computers. The whole point is to stop generating needless paper.

You worry yourself needlessly over a problem that has yet to occur, would be relatively minor should it occur, and fail to recognize the likelyhood that the new system will work far better, quicker, cheaper, and more reliably than the one it replaces.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, August, 07, 2007 3:27 PM Scottie writes:

Well Doc

Then let's not let the opportunity go to waste! Let's slime him every time he drops off one of his love packages. Since he won't return to see what is actually written in response, we can have a blast using his post as the kernal for a parody every time he does it. Are you game?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, August, 07, 2007 4:40 PM Jimmy Carter writes:

Hello from a fellow Townhall blogger

Great post about global warming and I agree.

I am contacting fellow bloggers from this country only.

If you are interested in a link exchange, I am confident that you would gain nothing in the exchange.

Thank you.

Jimmy Carter aka JC aka JimmyC aka Jimmy Carter

Keep up the good work on endangered species as you have done here.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, August, 07, 2007 5:57 PM Scottie writes:

Jimmy

roflmao
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, August, 07, 2007 6:54 PM Scottie writes:

Doc Steech

Make no mistake about it, our Jimmy is a national treasure. Good thing he's in Texas; a smaller state might cramp his style.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, August, 08, 2007 10:26 AM Anonymous Coward writes:

Voting Machines

I've followed the voting machine issues for a while from the hacking side. They are apparently not as hard to get into as one would think.
That aside, I think for the public's piece of mind the entire machine and source code should be available for public scutiny. Failing that the entire source code should be held in escrow in case of issues. Unfortunately niether is currently being done. Paper trail would be nice for recount purposes only if voters could read the ballot and then turn it in to the voting officials.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, August, 08, 2007 6:59 PM Scottie writes:

AC

I was wondering if you were going to weigh in on this. Given your vast knowledge in the area of computers and programming, would you discard the electronic machines?

Given that fraud is easier, not harder for paper ballots like scantrons and punchcards.

Given the high probablility of getting caught if the machines are gamed through statistical analysis?

Are the new machines more or less suceptable to fraud than alternatives in your opinion?

Do the benefits of quicker results and standardization outweigh the set of risks inherent in the technology?

I would love to hear your opinion on this in as much detail as you are comfortable with given your obvious time constraints. Please don't overlook the benefits as well as the problems in your assessment.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, August, 08, 2007 11:59 PM ShiningCity writes:

Scottie

I have come late because every time I sit to read your post, I get distracted by my nausea--related to how much taxes I paid last year. Then I have to go get a clear glass of water.

The water reminds me of the bridge that just collapsed due to failed maintenance. This peeves me even more considering that the money they stole from me is supposed to fix stuff like that.

To break my mind free from this torment, I walk outside in the forest where I see the postman deliver my mail, and I am reminded that stamps just increased to $.42--or whatever it is. And all I actually get in the mail are circulars, that I throw out. I do everything important on the web anyway.

It's everywhere. There's no escaping it.

The only consolation I have is considering that if I'm driving on a bridge and it collapses, then I'm going to drag my wounded wet body out of the fray, crawl to DC, and wrap my fingers around Nanci Pelosi's neck.

The pessimist in me wants to agree with Brian, but the youngster in me--who still has another 40 years to live in this fine country--says it ain't over til it's over.

Liked our response to the nuisance poster. I hate the string of "r's" in the name. It's unnatural.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 09, 2007 1:13 AM Anonymous Coward writes:

Scottie

I'm actually in favor of an electrical voting machine. It could potentionally save money, definately time and hopefully eliminate voting recounts.

However, I'm not in favor of them in the current state. Main reasons are as stated above it needs to be an open system the public can look at, granted the public won't know what they're looking at, but the security analysts will look at it and make sure its secure and it does exactly what its supposed to do and only that, plus from a political standpoint any closed voting machine will be viewed with suspision(the company may have rigged it) even if unfounded, further claims of fraud would require scrutinization of the softwares source code to be proven or disproven.

Also, during the transitionary period(4-8yrs) I'd feel safer with a papertrail, machine generates a paper ballot the voter can verify then turn into a box(I envision a bar code which is then scanned by an independent machine which displays the data in english, then dropped in the box). It's more of a pain than its probably worth in reality, but if it buys voter confidence then its what needs to be done.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 09, 2007 7:39 AM Scottie writes:

Shining City

Don't be so quick to demonize Nancy Pelosi. She actually hasn't done anything but preside over many many fruitless investigations and raise the minimum wage.

If you want to understand the bridge debacle, Thomas Sowell has a good analysis of the issue:

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2007/08/07/a_bridge_too_far_gone

My note on this, if the bridge is structurally deficient the answer is to fix it, not simply inspect it more often and say, "Yep, it's still got a problem."
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 09, 2007 8:03 AM Scottie writes:

AC

Given that the programming is basically a series of radio button sets and a compilation program that consolidates the choices into a single output, I don't see it being all that complicated. I'm sure the fly in the ointment is the part where it is run through some kind of encryption routine for sending it across the internet. Would you be satisfied with seeing all of the source code except the encryption module?

Secondly, printing the result on paper seems to defeat most of the benefit of the system. We have a lightening fast, accurate count, backed up by a very time consuming and far less accurate system.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 09, 2007 10:52 AM ShiningCity writes:

Scottie

Ms. Pelosi has done much more to harm this country than a simple minimum wage hike.

Her damage has been done over the past 15 years where she's been a vocal supporter of policies and behaviors that are destructive to the fabric of our nation. Taxes are just a symptom.

Part of why I'm paying so much is because of a perceived need to give all AIDS drugs away for free and to give out free needles to heroin users. And I'm paying for "artists" to put on a freak show in some San Francisco gallery.

And Ms. Pelosi has been instrumental in helping to perpetuate these very misguided ideas. I'm more worried about the effect of misguided ideology on this country than on the tax system.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 09, 2007 10:48 PM Anonymous Coward writes:

Scottie

As for the encrytions module shannon's maxim applies: its assumed the enemy knows the system, obviously the keys are kept secret though. As to it be a couple radio buttons true, however there's a whole branch of programming were the purpose is to offuscate the code(I could go to the extreme and ask for the whole thing to be written in a mathematically verifiable langauge as well) not to mention the security of the system to ensure votes can't be altered the system would require that only certified programs could run so it'd be trickier than a VB macro. Also, I'm stating the ENTIRE system is open, including the operating system. Also, it should be noted the votes don't go over the net, they're actually tallied on the individual machines at this point, then a rep from diebold (or another company if its not a diebold machine) retrieves them, running the votes over then net opens up a different can of worms I haven't thought about yet:).

As to the paper trail like I said its a confidence issue, I could care less but I think the public will. There are still alot of people who mistrust computers.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 09, 2007 11:19 PM Scottie writes:

Well Dear Lady

You can find out even more about San Fran Nan in the book, "Do As I Say, Profiles in Liberal Hypocracy." She got a whole chapter to herself. Here's a link to Amazon if you're interested.

http://www.amazon.com/Do-As-Say-Not-Hypocrisy/dp/0767919025/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-1288951-2268725?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1186715944&sr=8-1
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, August, 09, 2007 11:24 PM Scottie writes:

AC

Thanks for weighing in. Of course you would want open source; I expected that. And I think you agree that paper is more of a hand-holding for the technophobes among us. So Marie, if you're checking back in, we have it on as good an authority as I can personally muster that while your paper ballot result is comforting, it is really not necessary beyond being a security blanket.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, August, 10, 2007 7:24 AM -Kilroy writes:

Scottie

I have a new post over on Kilroy's. It might be too much of an inside joke for the wider audience to get but I thought you, in particular, would get a kick out of it.

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, August, 12, 2007 8:39 PM Anonymous Coward writes:

Scottie

Don't discount the people's need to feel comfortable with the situation. Just today at my favorite coffee shop, I overheard a conversation about how Bush stole Ohio in '04(they were idiots, but well articulated idiots). Interestingly, they could actually make such a claim, though their argument was unfounded. Here's the real one: Since the voting machines in Ohio were Diebold, which used a closed source software not held in escrow(only portions), there's no way to prove or disprove if it was without a papertrail(Well there technically is, but it'd take longer than 4 years...reading uncommented assembly is not easy).

If we loose confidence in our voting system, democracy will fail.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, August, 13, 2007 2:36 AM Sheila writes:

Scottie LOL

Amen,give the libs more rope...and I agree with your Norman Thomas quote.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, August, 13, 2007 8:49 AM Scottie writes:

AC

I'm all for an open, honest election system. But the Left will assert cheating where it dosen't exist every time they lose, and there is little to be done since they pay no penalty when they do so.

I find the probability of wideapread electoral manipulation even lower than the government having something to do with 9/11, but a significant portion of the populace will disagree. Up to 10% of the population actually believe if you mail a letter to Elvis Presley he will receive it.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, August, 13, 2007 8:56 AM Scottie writes:

Sheila

The best way to deal with a buffoon is to hand them the mike, give them center stage and let them do the work for you. The libs are so far off the reservation right now pandering to their various victim groups, I just don't see them veering back to the right far enough to claim any significant support from the middle. Everything they are saying now is being recorded and put into ads that will run next year. Always particularly delicious to see them hanged by their own words (e.g. I voted for the $ before I voted against it). Relax Sheila, it's gonna be a hoot next summer.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, August, 15, 2007 12:46 PM BrianR writes:

Scottie

Time for my usual shameless plug.

I just posted my long-awaited new essay at the Island. Come on down.....!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, August, 15, 2007 11:20 PM Scottie writes:

Doc Steech

You couldn't do much better than to copy Jimmy's parody from this thread and paste it in yours. Be sure to give Jimmy an attribution. Can't do much better than that one.

Let me see what he posted and see what we can see. I'm on my way over.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive