Are "we" spending too much?

oggy420 wrote:

lol bird can you admit that you're a socialist? You want the size and power and reach of government to exponentially grow till no end and you think that will solve everyone's problems? I think you've read the Communist Manifesto one too many times man.

what a tool you are.

Im a socialist because I think people who pay for medicare and social security should receive the benefits.

The conservatives created the original Mandate. are they socialists to?

oggy420 wrote:

and can we please differentiate real liberals from socialists. Obama and Bird a like are not liberals, they are not democrats. They are socialists. The believe in the state before the people. The government will dictate all aspects of your life so that we are all "equal" ie: equal slaves to the state. He tries to bash libertarians and conservatives (and im not saying Romney is either one of those) because he knows that if he didn't, he would be supporting freedom and individual liberty. As we all know, there is no room for the rights of an individual in a socialist society. Individuality is not recognized as everyone is expendable for the good of the state. And certainly as evident by Obama's continued assault on civil liberties, the rights of the individual are meaningless. There is no point in trying to get people who believe in this philosophy to understand a concept like and individual should have unalienable rights that can not be violated by the government, no matter how much better off the "group" (state) will be.

haha you call Paul a real Libertarian, he is a loon republican, at least Gary Johnson is actually attaining the libertarian platform.

Birdofthad wrote:

Farmer1906 wrote:

Farmer1906 wrote:

Birdofthad wrote:

and yes Cubua it is pom for the government to step in a bailout failed companies

George Bush started the process because he knew we would have crashed over the fiscal cliff if we didn't. Your argument is asinine. I guess we should have let the country fail

So you were pro Bush on that?

Another unaswered question.

Birdofthad wrote:

so you were with Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney on that?

They had differences stances, bro.

Just me and Obama on treatment and seasoning of dogs.

no they didn't, Paul Ryan was for the bailout and sent 3 letters asking for bailout funds.

Mitt Romney was for most of the bailout, just not on bailing out GM. (a really fucking weird stance)

George Bush started the bailout and said it was an emergency bailout and that another larger one would need to be implemented after the election.

I thought you followed this stuff.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=1

Cu Bu wrote:

Birdofthad wrote:

Im against someone who has taken 100's of millions of dollars out of the country, trying to tell me I need to pay 2,000 more in taxes while he gets another tax break.

Sorry thats the problem I have with Mitt Romney, add in he won't even show us his tax returns. Im not poor and sorry I get upset when millionaires try to cheat americans out of money by lying about their house value.

Romney did release his 2010 tax records( and an estimate on 2011).

Fact: he gave 3 million dollars to charity

Fact: Obama gave 250,000

Fact: that is the 14 % allowed to charity deducted on taxes

Fact: paid capital gains taxes which are 15%

Both candidates have rich people problems both gave 14% to charity to effectively lowered their taxable income .

Farmer1906 wrote:

Birdofthad wrote:

Farmer1906 wrote:

Farmer1906 wrote:

Birdofthad wrote:

and yes Cubua it is pom for the government to step in a bailout failed companies

George Bush started the process because he knew we would have crashed over the fiscal cliff if we didn't. Your argument is asinine. I guess we should have let the country fail

So you were pro Bush on that?

Another unaswered question.

Birdofthad wrote:

so you were with Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney on that?

They had differences stances, bro.

Just me and Obama on treatment and seasoning of dogs.

no they didn't, Paul Ryan was for the bailout and sent 3 letters asking for bailout funds.

Mitt Romney was for most of the bailout, just not on bailing out GM. (a really fucking weird stance)

George Bush started the bailout and said it was an emergency bailout and that another larger one would need to be implemented after the election.

I thought you followed this stuff.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=1

my brother I have stated in this thread, Romney was for the Stimulus Bailout, against the Auto Bailout, he suggested we do what you suggest. which would have led to at least 2 million jobs being lost.

and then get this, Mitt Romney tried to claim credit for the Auto Bailout after saying "let Detroit go Bankrupt"

http://www.forbes.com/sites/michelinemaynard/2012/05/08/mitt-romney-takes-credit-for-the-auto-bailout-say-what/

Also, you really fail to realize this, Bush created this mess and left Obama with a shit splattered room, with the fan going on high. The only logical thing to do at that time was a Bail Out, everything was in shambles and the damn economy was on the verge of complete collapse.

and of course, President George W. Bush got things rolling with the first assistance to the car companies, which kicked in just before Barack Obama took office and moved the ball further down the field.

If Romney was indeed pushing for the idea of a managed bankruptcy in the manner he describes, he wasn’t doing it where the automotive and political press corps could see it, beyond the op-ed page.