Bang, bang shoot'em up 1, 2, 3!
Subscribe
#111
Mr. Ford95 , 07-20-2010 10:08 PM
04-21-2019No I know that razor, what I meant was, he's supposedly never told us a lie or changed his position. Everytime someone calls him on it he skates around answering them or changes the subject or pulls a "it's my ball so I'm taking my ball and going home." Yes they all do it but he takes the cake with his reactions whenever he gets busted by the media over it so it's always funny to point out when he gets caught. His followers(I don't mean anyone here) always want to deny he got caught which is also funny. They try to spin the tar out of it.
#112
Quote:
This is where I take issue:
If that was the only change he referring to during his campaign, I just wish he would have said that. I heard his speeches and his promises, he should have just said, politics or "policies" as usual.
You took my statement out of context. But, I will be happy to discuss what I MEANT, perhaps this weekend.Originally Posted by Sharlie
Finally something WE both can agree on! This is where I take issue:
If that was the only change he referring to during his campaign, I just wish he would have said that. I heard his speeches and his promises, he should have just said, politics or "policies" as usual.
Quote:
The healthcare bill will tax Americans that President Obama promised he would NOT tax.
Please explain where you think the "TAX" will come in, so I can address this. (And I REALLY hope you mention the tanning bed tax! I'm loaded for THAT one.) :lol:The healthcare bill will tax Americans that President Obama promised he would NOT tax.
Quote:
Also, this is the last year of the Bush tax cuts that helped those that are married not be penalized by the tax code, he has not extended the tax cuts, so once again there will be taxes levied against many that in this economic climate frankly can't handle anymore decline in their wages.
Personally, I NEVER agreed with any tax cuts for marrieds that are not extended to singles. [14th Amendment] But, again.... I'll discuss this over the weekend.Also, this is the last year of the Bush tax cuts that helped those that are married not be penalized by the tax code, he has not extended the tax cuts, so once again there will be taxes levied against many that in this economic climate frankly can't handle anymore decline in their wages.
If I'm not mistaken..... He is NOT doing away with the exceptions for MIDDLE CLASS marrieds.... just like he is not repealing the Bush Tax Cuts on Income for the Middle Class.
Quote:
I named two, happy?
I'm happy enough that you are participating. Like I said.... I'll have a response, or at least a discussion, but TONIGHT I've been arguing with RoadRunner over JUST WHO owns this friggin computer!! I named two, happy?
#113
Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinance_of_Secession
The dates of their secessions are as follows.... Kentucky - November 20, 1861 and Missouri - October 31,1861
http://americancivilwar.com/documents/ordinance_secession.html
http://www.constitution.org/csa/ordinances_secession.htm#Missouri
http://www.constitution.org/csa/ordinances_secession.htm#Kentucky
They may not have remained Confederate states, and as history lessons tell us, there were Union outposts in these "neutral" states, however, Kentucky and Missouri DID secede.
By the way, I am resuming my search for the information that I found nearly ten years ago on the internet about Alabama not rejoining the Union. I have not found anything stating that they did in fact sign anything agreeing to rejoin, but rather were adopted in after ratifying the states constitution twice. The first time it was rejected still, insinuating that they were attempting to rejoin, and were obviously readmitted. I am not sure how reliable the information that I had found in the past about it not rejoining, but I know I found multiple sites in which that was stated. Having been over ten years ago, my memory fails me as to whether any of the publishers were reputable or not, so I am resuming my search for a little while in order to get some closure on this.
I'm having ALL KINDS of trouble accessing these links. Did you TYPE them in.... or cut and paste them? The hash marks have a space between them (I think) and some are missing the WWW part.Originally Posted by razorwyr
I'm not denying that either of them may or may not have been a neutral state.....I said they seceded, which they did. I do not trust Wikipedia in general due to the nature of the website, but here is a quick link to what I am referring.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinance_of_Secession
The dates of their secessions are as follows.... Kentucky - November 20, 1861 and Missouri - October 31,1861
http://americancivilwar.com/documents/ordinance_secession.html
http://www.constitution.org/csa/ordinances_secession.htm#Missouri
http://www.constitution.org/csa/ordinances_secession.htm#Kentucky
They may not have remained Confederate states, and as history lessons tell us, there were Union outposts in these "neutral" states, however, Kentucky and Missouri DID secede.
By the way, I am resuming my search for the information that I found nearly ten years ago on the internet about Alabama not rejoining the Union. I have not found anything stating that they did in fact sign anything agreeing to rejoin, but rather were adopted in after ratifying the states constitution twice. The first time it was rejected still, insinuating that they were attempting to rejoin, and were obviously readmitted. I am not sure how reliable the information that I had found in the past about it not rejoining, but I know I found multiple sites in which that was stated. Having been over ten years ago, my memory fails me as to whether any of the publishers were reputable or not, so I am resuming my search for a little while in order to get some closure on this.
It COULD just be my Internet Explorer version or something. But, it has taken me down a road of "installations" of toolbars that I NEVER wanted to do! :lol:
issedoff:Anyone ELSE having a problem with these links?
#114
Mr. Ford95 , 07-22-2010 10:01 PM
Quote:
It COULD just be my Internet Explorer version or something. But, it has taken me down a road of "installations" of toolbars that I NEVER wanted to do! :lol:issedoff:
Anyone ELSE having a problem with these links?
Little extra work with my keyboard but I got them to come up.:thumbsup:Originally Posted by golfhobo
I'm having ALL KINDS of trouble accessing these links. Did you TYPE them in.... or cut and paste them? The hash marks have a space between them (I think) and some are missing the WWW part.It COULD just be my Internet Explorer version or something. But, it has taken me down a road of "installations" of toolbars that I NEVER wanted to do! :lol:
issedoff:Anyone ELSE having a problem with these links?
Hobo, that healthcare "tax" is the federal mandate that if you don't have healthcare they penalize you. They had to clarify it before a court, was it a tax or not. So the penalty is a tax for not having it is what they told the court and the country. The Repubs kept saying it was a tax and that the Dems were simply not calling it a tax. When they had to clarify it, guess what, the Repubs were correct, it was a tax. In other news, Obama dropped another 15 points in the public's eye to a 36% confidence rating. He lost 15 points in 1 month in the Gallup poll. Still ahead of Bush's 26% in his final year but Obama is gaining ground quickly. Congress as a whole was even worse, 11% rating. Obama's overall approval rating is down to 46%.
#115
Windwalker , 07-23-2010 01:57 AM
I'm thinking that even Palin would be able to win over Obama in the next election... At least, then, gun rights would be preserved.:thumbsup:
And, no. I do not own a gun.
And, no. I do not own a gun.
#116
RebelDarlin , 07-23-2010 04:55 AM
These should work for most users. No guarantees for Hobo of course.
Tip: when using the link feature in the message creator make sure that you delete the http:// that is already there before you paste your link. Otherwise it is in there twice and the link doesn't work. BTW, most browsers do not need the 'http' it is added by default, you only need the 'www...'.
Quote:
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinance_of_Secession
The dates of their secessions are as follows.... Kentucky - November 20, 1861 and Missouri - October 31,1861
americancivilwar.com/documents/ordinance_secession.html
www.constitution.org/csa/ordinances_secession.htm#Missouri
www.constitution.org/csa/ordinances_secession.htm#Kentucky
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinance_of_Secession
The dates of their secessions are as follows.... Kentucky - November 20, 1861 and Missouri - October 31,1861
americancivilwar.com/documents/ordinance_secession.html
www.constitution.org/csa/ordinances_secession.htm#Missouri
www.constitution.org/csa/ordinances_secession.htm#Kentucky
Tip: when using the link feature in the message creator make sure that you delete the http:// that is already there before you paste your link. Otherwise it is in there twice and the link doesn't work. BTW, most browsers do not need the 'http' it is added by default, you only need the 'www...'.
#117
Quote:
I'm having ALL KINDS of trouble accessing these links. Did you TYPE them in.... or cut and paste them? The hash marks have a space between them (I think) and some are missing the WWW part.
I'm having ALL KINDS of trouble accessing these links. Did you TYPE them in.... or cut and paste them? The hash marks have a space between them (I think) and some are missing the WWW part.
I cut and pasted them, but I was probably pretty tired when I did it, so it is entirely possible that I did some modifications to the links before/after I cut and pasted them.
#118
Quote:
These should work for most users. No guarantees for Hobo of course.
I appreciate it....I just figured that a little extra effort makes the information that much more valuable right?These should work for most users. No guarantees for Hobo of course.
#120
RebelDarlin , 07-23-2010 05:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by razorwyr
I appreciate it....I just figured that a little extra effort makes the information that much more valuable right?
No problem.
