You give me a direct answer. You dodge it like he does.
Posted By: sam on 2008-10-31
In Reply to: I see sam has yet to provide us with evidence - where OBAMA said his tax cuts/credits...sm
How can he give 95% of AMericans a tax cut if 30-40% of Americans pay no federal income taxes. Either he is lying about the 95%, or he is going to use refundable tax credits. How else can he do it? PLEASE, PLEASE, explain that to me. If I am wrong, all you have to do is explain to me HOW he is going to give tax cuts to 95% of people, 30-40% of whom DO NOT PAY federal income taxes, wITHOUT cutting them a check. Please, please explain that to me.
Sam understands the basic principles of socialism and Marxism just fine. Most of which Mr Obama taught me in his books and associations. Which you are willing to ignore.
So please...very simply. Explain to me how he is going to give tax breaks or cuts to 95% of Americans if 30-40% of that group don't pay taxes. You said yourself, he can't. So either he is lying about the 95%...or he is going to cut that 30-40% a check.
PLEASE explain his tax plan to me since you are such an expert on it. HOW is he going to do it without cutting checks? HOW?
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
nice dodge. You didn't answer the question.
nm
Are you not able to answer a simple direct question?
It's obviously over your head.
Still waiting for a direct answer to a simple question.
nm
My post was a direct answer to the direct post...
of Democrat. It was not a blank open-ended statement. And dial it back a notch...it is certainly your right to protest anything any time you want to. Just like it is my right to protest you protesting while men and women are still in harm's way, because you are in effect aiding the enemy. Apparently the Viet Nam experience taught you nothing. Americans protesting in the streets heartened the enemy and when they were about to surrender decided not to, based a lot upon what was happening in the American streets. I believe that the protesting in that war prolonged the war and cost more American lives. Hanoi Jane should have been tried for treason. That being said...lessons were not learned and the protestors are doing the exact same thing now. Exercising the very right bought for them by shedding of American military blood. And I still say common courtesy should keep people out of the streets and off the TV until the military are home safe. But it just proves the same thing to me over and over...the selfISHhness of the protestors vs. the selfLESSness of the military. They continue to put it all on the line for your right to protest anything you want to protest...it is up to YOU to decide where and when that is appropriate, and it is up to you to take the heat for same. It is up to me and others like me (in my opinion) to apply that heat. Go ahead and do whatever your conscience or lack thereof moves you to do. But do not expect those of a different mind not to protest the protest.
Must also be hard for some people to give direct answers after making a statement like that.
nm
Can someone give me an answer here.
The price of gas is creeping up because companies have cut back the refining of oil. Now....why are they allowed to do this? It is merely for profit. They are just doing this to jack up prices and that benefits no one especially during this economic crisis here. So why are they allowed to do this?
no, he does not give them time to answer
I always like Chris Matthews, always have but today I found him in meltdown phase. He did not give the republican guest time to answer the question "Do you believe Barak Obama was calling Sarah Palin a pig". The guest got maybe 3 or 4 words out and mathews kept saying do you believe...., do you believe....the guest is trying to answer him which was "no I don't believe he called her a pig" and then went on to state how during these times the candidates need to be careful with their words, etc, etc. No, he was not as fair to the republican guest as he was to the democrat guest. If your a democrat sure you think this is great, but to the republicans and independents this is rude and unprofessional for the host of a talk show. What ever happened to letting a guest answer, if he didn't answer the question, then tell you you didn't not answer my question. Not keep interrupting him every 3 or 4 minutes with the same badgering. Come on - this is totally one sided.
BTW - the guest did answer his question about 4 or 5 times.
He did give her time to answer, but
she just kept avoiding the question. I saw it this morning (they have re-runs at 5 a.m.).
I did think he was a little harsh on Helen Thomas even though she is a liberal.
Answer the question. Why do you give them a pass?
The ones responsible for this.
By the way, if the 92 Democrats who voted no had voted yes, it would have passed anyway.
His teleprompter didn't give him an answer
/
This from the Queen of dodge.
nm
She did not dodge the question. ...
Katie Couric was going to keep hounding her, trying to get her to say something she was not going to say. I think she honestly had no knowledge if the man was still getting money from fannie or not, and why should she, and what would that have to do with being Vice President of the Unites States. The campaign told her, and he told her, he was not still getting money from them. She told Katie Couric what she knew...and the same stance the campaign and the man himself has said...he stopped doing any lobbying for fannie and taking any money from them when he started with the McCain campaign because of conflict of interest...the same reason that Joe Biden's son (a professional lobbyist in DC for quite awhile now) stopped his lobbying when his dad got the nomination, because of conflict of interest. Don't look for Katie Couric to be asking Biden about his son and MBNA. The mainstream media has a clear bias. I thought Palin did well not to fall into the carefully laid trap. It was not that she dodged...Katie Couric made it appear that way because she was not willing to accept the answer Palin gave. That is a "gotcha" interview.
No, I have not seen a proposal from either candidate about not using taxpayer dollars to help this crisis. I don't think that is possible...the government in and of itself has no money. Any money they have comes from us, the taxpayer, so any money they use comes from us, the taxpayer. We are left holding the bag.
I do have a problem, tho, with spending billions to to buy up bad mortgages where people made bad decisions, taking on a mortgage they know they could not afford. The rest of us wh struggle to make mortgage payments are getting zip out of this, except to take care of those people as well. And you KNOW the government is not going to foreclose on anyone...political suicide. So what happens then? If they do bail them out, then they need to restructure them in some way that those people can continue to make payments.
We'll see.
another dodge. The question is about
It does not involve invoking the name of his opponent. Obviously, there is not one single republican on this board with enough balls to conujure up anything that remotely resembles a McCain economic initiative. Actually, no answer is really an answer in an of itself. You can't do it because of the elephant in the room. His policies are an exact duplication of W's....the policies that an entire nation is running far and wide to escape.
I have a 1991 Dodge with 450,000
miles on it. We have rebuilt the rear end, but it still has the original clutch. Again, pulled a heavy horse trailer for many many of those miles.
Trying to dodge the facts again I see
You know very well that that wasn't the point. It doesn't take a mind reader to see when faced with facts you change the subject. Yes it is a republican bashing board and if you don't agree then you haven't been reading the posts on this board. This board meaning the politics section of MT Stars. Just wanted to state that as you must be looking at the wrong board. I'm talking about this one here. But I guess you think that bashing republicans/independents and anyone who doesn't agree with you is not really bashing. Then the bashing posters pat themselves on the back congratulating each other for the wonderful bashing they just did with a self-righteous attitude, but I guess you don't consider that bashing. All you have to do is read the posts one by one and you will see.
Just going down the board just a short ways I found 17 bashing of republicans to 6 nonbashing (rebuttals to the bashing). I haven't come across any posts that started out with the original poster bashing someone who doesn't think the way they do.
But then I guess you consider Republican/independent bashing not to really be bashing.
Of course you find any article that bashes the republicans and is filled with propaganda to be interesting, but it certainly is not going to render any "thoughtful or intelligent discussions" just more of the same mumbo jumbo.
By the way, I never said your posts cause me any distress. Don't know where you came up with that one. Probably the same place you think this is a vitrolic Democrat-hating board. Just because you say it is doesn't mean its true.
Good dodge, but it doesn't let you off the hook with regards to the point
x
New Orleans collects dead as officials dodge blame
By Mark Egan
NEW ORLEANS (Reuters) - New Orleans began the gruesome task of collecting its thousands of dead on Sunday as the Bush administration tried to save face after its botched rescue plans left the city at the mercy of Hurricane Katrina.
Except for rescue workers and scattered groups of people, streets in the once-vibrant capital of jazz and good times were all but abandoned after a mass exodus of hundreds of thousands of refugees into neighboring Texas and other states.
Battered and sickened survivors made no attempt to disguise their anger: We have been abandoned by our own country, Aaron Broussard, president of Jefferson Parish, just south of New Orleans, told NBC's Meet the Press.
It's not just Katrina that caused all these deaths in New Orleans, Broussard said. Bureaucracy has committed murder here in the greater New Orleans area, and bureaucracy has to stand trial before Congress now.
After a nightmare confluence of natural disaster and political ineptitude that al Qaeda-linked Web sites called evidence of the wrath of God striking America, National Guard troops and U.S. marshals patrolled the city, stricken in the days after the hurricane by anarchic violence and looting.
Local and federal officials said they expected to find thousands of corpses still floating in flood waters or locked inside homes and buildings destroyed by the devastating storm that struck the U.S. Gulf coast last Monday.
When we remove the water from New Orleans, we're going to uncover people who died hiding in houses, who got caught by the flood. People whose remains will be found in the street, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff told Fox News.
AS UGLY AS YOU CAN IMAGINE
There'll be pollution. It is going to be about as ugly a scene as you can imagine.
Later, Chertoff flew into New Orleans and said the search for storm victims would be arduous. Let me be clear: we're going to have to go house to house in this city, he said. This is not going to happen overnight.
President George W. Bush, who in a rare admission of error, conceded on Friday that the results of his administration's relief efforts were unacceptable, said on Saturday he would send 7,200 more active-duty troops over three days. Continued ...
© Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved.
See link for entire article.
I do believe that there is a direct
response to the OP with the title of "You're Whack." The inside message said, "Who cares? So what? Get a life."
Seriously...if you have nothing constructive to add, why waste your time responding with that?
I guess I just don't get why some of you hate Christians so much? I admit that there are those who try and force their religion upon others. I don't do that. If someone doesn't want to believe in what I do, like my husband, I don't push my views on him. However, he doesn't ridicule me for believing either.
It just seems like every time someone mentions something about religion the bashing and name calling, etc. starts. I'm beginning to think that maybe Christians should be placed on the hate crime list because it sure sounds like a lot of people hate us.
Can someone direct me to a site (sm)
that states the candidates' detailed respective platforms at a glance? I've watched most of the debates, as much as I can anyhow, but I've not been able glean and distinguish a lot of specifics.
I'm in FL and vote on Tuesday. Believe it or not, I am undecided. I liked Dennis, but he pulled out today and probably wouldn't have voted for him... won't go into why, but I'm sure I don't have to :-)
Dennis says to go Obama.... not sure if I want to. What I want is to have a Dem president. I like Edwards...
My demographic falls into Hilary's (female 45 and over lol).
Input appreciated.
that was a direct quote from
Ronald Reagan. How SHAMEFUL that you make fun of a dead man and one with Alzheimer's to boot. I am appalled at your lack of manners.
I believe this is a direct quote from big O
'The buck stops here.'
May I politely and respectfully direct you
back to God's word? Obviously a little more study and maturing will do you no harm.
You know, I hate hypocrisy. You want to direct me
back to God's Word?
When you can show me in God's Word where He approves of what Osambo approves, then we can talk.
Let's talk abortion, gay marriage, taxes, lying, cheating, subversion of government, indoctrination of preschoolers, redefining marriage, etc., a whole litany of what Osambo stands for and compare it to God Almighty's Word.
I warn you in advance. You are up against an adversary you do not want to tackle with because you are ill prepared to defend your comments and beliefs in the light of Scripture.
Ready to go for it, old girl?
Please direct me to the bible verse where it is written
about the right to bear arms. I missed this.
"They are no more pro war than God is. They do believe in the right to bear arms..."
Terrible debate! Jim was not direct or specific enough in his ...sm
questions and allowed too much of the same old retoric from both candidates.
Don't want to direct quote, can't stand to watch it again sm
The point being, cutting unnecessary procedures to seniors who "would not get any better anyway." I was so fuming angry that I would like everyone to hear it, but I for one could not stand watching it again. We are bailing out all these losers and he's going to deny our seniors. If he touches their benefits, I will march on Washington. Most of them paid their way all their lives and now they're being "cut" because he thinks it's frivalous as they "wouldn't get any better anyway." Who the blazes is he to make that decision???? Everyone deserves a choice of care, even Gramma and Grampa. I don't care how old they are!
Yeah, direct me to some homosexual "scientific"
site. Believe me, if that were the case, it would be well publicized, especially in the New York Times.
Don't you even know that the first "scientists" who "came out" with a gay gene were homosexuals? You don't think they have an agenda, my dear?
Nan-ism post was in direct reply/rebuttal to the two posts above it.
Surely you would agree that when accused of something we should have a chance for rebuttal? And that our rebuttal would surely include proof/evidence of why we took a particular stand? Would you deny the liberal board that right? SOME of us may be tolerant (or as Nan put it, "sissies") but some of us are very capable of speaking up for ourselves.
I have read Nan on this board (and others as well) for almost two years so I think I have a pretty fair grasp of her opinion and style of posting.
Feel free to direct your concerns to the Administrator. sm
You can reach the adminstrator at Admin@MTStars.com. As far as deleting, since the incident of several weeks ago, I have made a concerted effort on BOTH boards to keep the bashing to a minimum.
Hardly. Consorting with vs direct quote? Supports succession
The quote thing, whether SP or her husband is not the only example of the problems SP will be facing once the convention is over and the campaign goes into high gear. So far, this morning, you have managed to dodge every single effort to elicit a response to SP's OWN words. Dismiss the pastor, but not her own preaching on video. That just won't fade away no matter how much spin you are able to produce. These are land mines waiting for detonation.
With regard to the "got not use for America's damned institutions" and support of succession question, these issues will not play well for yer in terms of country first, in the context of ethics (can't practice what is preached) and when it comes to change versus same old stuff.
Before pronoucing this as a nonissue, suppose we give this a little time to play out in the political arena? Your guilt by association campaign has already run its course, and Obama managed to clench the nomination. In the light of the blaring negative publicity that will be issuing forth in the weeks to come with SP being the newest rock star on the block, how much political mileage do you really think that empty tank is going to give you?
The huge emphasis on tomorrow is in direct proportion to
Finally. A President we can all be PROUD of, instead of hide-your-head-in-a-bag EMBARRASSED.
Paying close attention. Sidestepping direct debate.
nm
Annan Urges U.S.-Iran Direct Talks in Atomic Dispute (Update3)...sm
Annan Urges U.S.-Iran Direct Talks in Atomic Dispute (Update3)
May 12 (Bloomberg) -- United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan today said the U.S. needs to follow up on Iranian offers of direct negotiations in order to resolve peacefully their dispute over the Islamic Republic's nuclear program.
``I've asked all sides to lower their rhetoric and intensify their diplomatic efforts to find a solution,'' Annan said at a briefing in Vienna. ``I think it's important that the United States comes to the table.''
The U.S. has let French, German and U.K. diplomats lead talks with Iran over the atomic dispute. Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, at a meeting of the Developing Eight group of Islamic countries in Indonesia, said Iran is ready for direct talks and will comply with any UN decision on its atomic program based on international rules. A U.S. State Department spokesman in Vienna declined to comment.
The U.K. and France, backed by the U.S., have proposed a resolution under Chapter 7 of the United Nations charter to compel Iran to stop its nuclear work. A Chapter 7 resolution can invoke economic sanctions or military force against ``any threat to the peace'' of other countries. Iran says it's developing nuclear technology to generate power, while the U.S. and European countries accuse Iran of trying to develop atomic weapons.
China and Russia, veto-wielding members of the Security Council, oppose a Chapter 7 resolution for Iran.
Iran's Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency said he didn't have any information about an Agence France-Presse report that inspectors found traces of highly enriched uranium in his country.
Uranium Particles
``I haven't been informed of any such findings,'' Aliasghar Soltanieh said in a telephone interview.
Particles of weapons-grade uranium came from sample swipes that International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors took at the Lavizan-Shian site in Tehran, where a physics research center was dismantled and topsoil removed in 2004 after suspicions were raised about activities there, AFP said.
The IAEA reported to the Security Council on April 28 that inspectors took environmental samples at suspected nuclear sites in their most recent visit to Iran. The samples were to undergo testing for uranium particles at IAEA laboratories. IAEA spokespeople declined to comment.
The Iranians won't ``put everything on the table'' until the U.S. joins the European-led negotiations, Annan said. Negotiations should be around a ``comprehensive package'' including economic and regional security concerns, he said.
`Engaged in Dialogue'
Annan's call for direct talks between Iran and the U.S. followed those of Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the IAEA. ``Once we get to security issues, the U.S. should be engaged in the dialogue,'' ElBaradei said March 8.
The Security Council's five permanent members plus Germany will meet in London May 19 to consider new incentives for Iran to renounce its atomic program, AFP reported, citing unidentified diplomats. The permanent five are the U.S., U.K., France, Russia and China.
The U.S. and Iran broke off diplomatic relations in 1979 after Islamic revolutionaries overthrew the government of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and kept 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. |
To contact the reporter on this story:
Jonathan Tirone in Vienna at jtirone@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: May 12, 2006 10:33 EDT |
why do you answer so stupidly, the right answer
if you had any brains, would have been......
'well, she made a mistake.'
But telling me that I need a job, is so stupid, yes, stupid AND a very weak point.
Post the direct link. I don't see the post you're referring to.
t
I can answer that. The answer is no. nm
Answer
I was frequently banned on the old forum format, at least once a week during the weeks I was actually posting (I would then get disgusted and stay away for up to a month at a time). Have only been banned once since the new format so I would agree with your analysis.
Otherwise as to other folks banned, I remember lots and lots of complaints/comments but can offer no specifics. I also remember seeing a lot of interesting posts go poof! Used to really really be bad on the old religion board. But hopefully that's improved also.
I would have bet it all that you would answer this way.
I suppose you also believe that poverty causes crime.
You would not like my answer
so I won't even go there...
So the answer is yes,
Where did the soldier in the article lie?
I come from a family with multiple generations who served and continue to serve in the military, including Iraq, so spare me your little lecture about troop morale.
Have a lovely day.
This should answer...
at least one of your questions. I found this site: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/MedicaidGenInfo/05_SCHIP%20Information.asp
Which states that in general, states can not permit the implementation of preexisting condition exclusions.
However, in states like South Carolina, where SCHIP is run through BCBS, they can implement preexisting condition exclusions, but only in so far as HIPAA rules allow - which I would assume (have not researched) is the 12 month waiting period.
As for your other question, I have a muscle disease (big time preexisting) and I can't even get health coverage privately. I have to struggle to work full time, even on the days I feel like my whole body is on fire, just to get group coverage. I had the 12 month preexisting condition thing, with which they are denying everything - saying that it's all related to the preexisting condition - and I pay $260 a month. I should also mention that this coverage is just for me - no children/spouse.
Hope that helps.
Thanks for the answer....
and you have a good one as well.
Right...there is no answer.
You want it your way or no way and want to squelch any kind opposition. Sounds more like the the old USSR than the old USA. There's that Marxist thing again.
answer...
Again you prove my point. And MSNBC, CNN, and the others are any different, except their slant is to the left? You really think people don't notice that? lol.
Dear...drop the condescencion. Demographics can have many meanings other than the one you describe.
I was talking about news outlets. I know there are other places to get the conservative view...but I want to get both sides. I don't watch the commentators much on either side...hard to find a point in the bashing, and that means both sides. Mostly I just turn them off.
you just know everything, don't you...have an answer for everything
no matter what anyone says, you (meaning the posters on here who continually try to bully everyone into their own way of thinking) will defend her - even if she was caught in bed literally with John McCain you would have an answer for that.
I heard an interview by Jodie Foster where she stated she literally hates weakness of any kind, in any thing. She said if there was a bird fallen out of a nest (to that affect) on the sidewalk in front of her she would want to kick it. That is the majority of what I see on these boards. Nastiness, aggressiveness, women toward women. Do you think kindness is a weakness, because I know most men do. I personally do not want to be a man.
That is okay, Jesus has said the weak shall inherit the earth - I will follow Jesus' teachings before I would ever follow people who think killing over 1 million innocent people is a good thing and are blood-thirsty for even more lives and souls, a majority of which comes right from the pulpits. I think I read somewhere those people will suffer most at the end of the world - as for me I am making sure I am not one of them.
Might is right, bigger is better - you can have all of it and women can get as aggressive as they want but you will find out it was wrong when men do it and it is wrong for women to do it.
here's the answer
I, too, am in a quandry about this election, but I do know that opening up drilling for oil in Alaska is just a temporary solution. We are spending 10 billion ($$$) a month for the war in Iraq. Why are we there? For oil. Think how far that money would go towards developing new alternative energy sources in this country in order to free ourselves from our addiction to foreign oil. Even in Dubai, where they currently have plenty of oil, they are cuttng edge in the development of alternative energy sources. Even they realize the oil is not going to last forever!!. The powers that be in this country are so ignorant and greedy that they refuse to see that this is the ONLY SOLUTION to this madness!!! Wake up, people. This is a change that will garner HUGE improvements in all matters of economy and environment, and showing the rest of the world that the US can be an example in leading the way to making these changes!!!
That's really the best answer
Don't talk to them about it. Judging by this board, things can get very heated and nasty and really, has anyone changed their minds after reading any of this stuff? I think at this point most of us know who we are going to vote for and arguing is just pointless.
Answer. sm
I realize what trouble we are in. That is why it frightens me that this bimbo is literally 1 heartbeat away from the presidency.
See answer above. Aha. nm
nm
Answer
The same number of Democrats as Republicans.
Looking for a serious answer...
I am looking for a REAL answer to this. Not a snide remark from either dems or pubs.
Why are the presidents, leaders, etc of nations we aren't "friendly" with supporting Obama?
Just real answers please. I think we are up to our ears in sarcastic remarks on this board.
|
