You Don’t Screw With “The Man”
In a case that’s more instructive in government power and control than most anything a liberal, or civil libertarian might opine upon, Wesley Snipes received the maximum sentence, 36 months in prison for not paying his taxes.
While I personally believe too much is made of alleged civil liberty encroachments under Bush and in the so-called war on terror – there is no greater threat to freedom in a capitalist society than that of the government to tax and regulate activity.
I’m not suggesting Snipes isn’t guilty, or shouldn’t go to jail, but you never hear a peep from the supposed freedom loving liberals when it comes to how government taxes and spends, thereby controlling our lives, as well as our livelihoods.
You can peace march all you want, try to persecute telco’s for providing information to the government, and stage all the faux torture events you want in protest of government actions.
But what’s perfectly clear in America today is one thing – you don’t screw with the tax man. Never let it be said that our government doesn’t know from whence its power springs.
It would be wise to consider that when debating hyper-regulative responses to issues like global warming and supporting politicians who love big government. It always comes with a price. And ultimately that price is freedom, just as much as it is dollars.
In relative terms, there will be little or no liberal hand-wringing over the Snipes conviction, which causes one to wonder if they really understand freedom at all. Snipes appears to be guilty, but he WAS striking Big Brother at its heart in a way few if any anti-war protesters ever do.
And the message is clear – Big Brother knows how to deal with threats to its collective heart when they really matter.
Issues like the above are why I genuinely question the motivations of liberals today. They claim to be championing liberty. Yet nearly everything they champion calls for more taxation and regulation. One can’t do both and be intellectually consistent, or honest.
“but you never hear a peep from the supposed freedom loving liberals when it comes to how government taxes and spends”
Quite the contrary.
I’m a freedom loving liberal who gets quite pissed about taxpayers funding sports stadiums. And the taxpayer funded Iraq goodwill mission is another.
I’m sure there’s more but have business to take care of and can’t go on.
And by the way, Dan, not a great post but your best one in a week.
Thanks.
You’re confused because they would be more accurately pegged as Leftists; their liberalism bears little resemblance to the classical Liberalism you think of when you hear the word, “liberal”. That liberalism morphed into radical liberalism in the post-war era. As such, they are being true to their beliefs and not hypocritical when they embrace the tax man AND decry government intrusiveness.
Let’s not forget those other expensive lefty pet projects…Free Tibet and liberate Darfur.
Easy to imagine, quite expensive in blood and treasure to do.
Like I always tell my children. “Independence springs out of the back of your wallet. A fat wallet provides more independence then a thin one.” It is in government’s interest to ensure it has a fat wallet and you have a thin wallet”.
Yeah, but the guys that stomped that trucker into the ground on TV during the Rodney King riots got less time — precisely because the liberal types made such a fuss.
The income tax is administered by the government to support a private corporation–the Federal Reserve System.
The purpose of the tax is to remove as many Federal Reserve Notes as possible from circulation, to prevent them from inflating into total uselessness. They haven’t been removing quite enough recently, as you may have noticed.
“From whence” is redundant. I think you just mean “whence”. I’m just saying . . .
We should all just stop paying taxes entirely. That would fix everything, and we’d finally be free. Plus, without our tax money, the government couldn’t go after us.
No, it’ll never happen. The liberals who don’t care about Wesley’s plight would probably come after us, hurling lattes and demanding payouts to cover their expenses for having to go after us. That’s pretty much what government is anyway, so why bother. Might as well just pay taxes, bitch about it, and laud the brave ones like Wesley who resist the man.
Usage note Although sometimes criticized as redundant on the grounds that “from” is implied by the word whence, the idiom from whence is old in the language, well established, and standard. Among its users are the King James Bible, Shakespeare, Dryden, and Dickens: Hilary finally settled in Paris, from whence she bombarded us with letters, postcards, and sketches.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/whence
The Lefty projects “Save Darfur” and “Free Tibet” willl cost nothing in blood and treasure.
Because they intend nothing whatever be done about them.
If George Bush sent Marines to Darfur, once again it would be “No blood for oil”.
The Left thinks they can free Tibet and save Darfur by holding signs and wishing.
Seriously Gabriel. The way to free Tibet and save Darfur is to stop paying taxes. Why don’t those lefties see that?
Dan,
I am not sure if I understand your post. Are you saying Liberals don’t understand freedom because they accept the theory and process of taxation?
Moldy
“One can’t do both and be intellectually consistent, or honest.”
If it has taken you until 2008 to figure out that liberals are neither consistent, honest, or for ‘liberty’ at all, than you are a slow one…
Who ever said that Liberals today care about Liberty? They don’t even know the word. They would choke on it. Liberals/Leftists/Progressives care about exerting maximum power and control. They believe in ‘minorities’ rising up against white males. They believe in income re-distribution. No, that’s too fair actually. That would mean they at least want everyone at the same level. They want to take away 100% from some to give to others. You want a ‘Liberal’ paradise? Look no farther than Venezuela, Cuba, Zimbabwe. Watch Chavez, Castro, and Mugabe take control of all private property, industry and resources and give it not to the people but to those in the ‘government.’ Care about Wesley Snipes? If he were a Leftist, they would have t-shirts with his picture on it. Because he’s a black man, they give him the courtesy of remaining quiet. If he were white they would cheer his imprisonment. If he were a Jew they would dance in the streets and use his name as an epithet of everything wrong in the world because of the Jews that control it. Liberty?
And regarding their resistance to privacy intrusion and civil liberties? That’s only because it’s George Bush and Republicans using it to catch terrorists (i.e. leftists). Who knows which leftists in America might be on that phone call with terrorist organizations? Might be Ayers, Obama, Carter. But, watch a Democratically controlled government use technology to invade every aspect of your life for taxation. Watch them install video cameras everywhere. Watch them track your car with a GPS to tax your driving every which way. Watch them not just monitor, but actually control your thermostat. Watch them monitor and tax you for being overweight, for smoking, for too many children, etc. Sound too Big Brother futurish? These are all current proposals.
we could end this expensive government program in Iraq and save billions on our tax dollars.
Or we could be hypocrites and be fiscal conservatives.
I also don’t understand why I’m supposed to care and feel sorry for some rich HOLLYWOOD jerk who couldn’t part with a small portion of his millions.
“I also don’t understand why I’m supposed to care and feel sorry for some rich HOLLYWOOD jerk who couldn’t part with a small portion of his millions.”
Because he is black. In fact, blacker than Obama, who is himself blacker than Wright.
Under an Obama regime, non-blacks will be taxed in order to pay a fief to blacks. Any resistance to this will not be tolerated.
It is no stretch at all to seeing liberals, (read Democrats), as enemies of the country and our constitution. I have taken the oath many times to protect and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. The day may come when senior leadereship orders the arrest of some of these citizens. I know if I had gotten the order it would have been, “yes sir.” The line they walk is not as thin as most would have you believe. Lincoln would have had a third of the democrats in congress in jail for treason and/or sedition. The Democrats are always reminding us of the number of our war dead. All the dead can be laid at the feet of our elected officials. How are the dead to be divided? Some are dead because they followed orders of those officials, some are dead because the enemy was assisted by some of those officials. What’s the split?
CAN’T RESIST >>>>
http://shortcircuitz.mtv.com/music-videos/599/bush-vs.-kanye/
You don’t want it from the President (Hell, no, Kanye)…
This is a bit much. No one likes taxes, but what is the alternative? Anarchy. We must have a common defense, courts, and the like. There is no question about that unless you’re an anarchist. How are these to be paid for? There are many theoretical ways, but the most obvious and easily worked is a tax.
What is done with tax money is a separate issue, as is the level of taxation, but I don’t believe that anyone has found a workable alternative to taxation in the history of mankind.
Complaining about the existence of a tax is nothing more than childishness.
A tax must be enforced to work. THere’s really no getting around it.
How often do you hear liberals screaming for Liberty?
More often them scream for “equality” or “justice”, which means “using the government to force you to do what I want”.
Skyler: To address your question, there are things called fees whereby you pay for the service you incurred rather than having your money dumped into a general fund so that you no longer know what you are paying for.
Why is it the same people who defend the right to privacy [you can do whatever you want in your bedroom ...] think nothing of requiring documentation and disclosure of our most trivial economic activities. Oh thats right- they want their ‘cut’
Come now brave patriots. People need to pay taxes to pay for VICTORIES in Iraq. Remember, tax money= victory against evil-doers. The trooops are counting on you.
The SURGE would not be working without you!!
As true as it is (above), the ever-increasing means of collecting taxes compound the attacks on liberty. “Let them tax the smokes” or carbon or breast implants [nothing's off of the table]. They torment honest people, push us into underground economies, proliferate crime and – once they’ve killed of a big enough sector (cigarettes) – bitch because tax revs are down. What to do… another tax increase to make up for the short-falls!
As always, the power to tax is the power to destroy. I teach my young kids about taxes firsthand and in a way that hits home to them: whenever we fix them dessert I make sure to, before handing whatever it is over to them, to take a big tablespoon full away in front of them with that admonition “that’s paying taxes.” It never fails to provoke outrage.
As an aside, leftists/liberals in the pocket of the illegal alien brigades always decry deporting some illegal and “separating him/her from their family here in the US” – well what the hell does sending someone to jail for not paying taxes do?? Of course they’re happy to see some “rich, tax cheating bastard” frog-marched off to prison for not funding their programs.
Please, be a better journalist that the freaking mainstream media.
Wesley Snipes is not being jailed for “not paying his taxes.” As it is not against the law to not pay your taxes.
Mr. Snipes is being jailed for something else: failing to report his income to the IRS.
You are free to not pay your taxes. You are not, however, free to fail to report your income. Tax payment in the United States, for individuals who are not subject to withholding, is voluntary. Says so right there on your tax return. Individuals who are subject to withholding by their employers end up paying taxes, but only because their employers are required to withhold them. So, the employee never sees the money.
But nobody in this country can be jailed for failing to pay their taxes.
This post doesn’t make sense. Anybody remember “Taxation without representation”? The war of Independence was fought because of it. Not “Taxation” per se, note. The idea that you can have all the public goods we associate with government, a collective defense etc. without taxation is just stupid. And to equate low or no taxation with freedom is a non sequitur. One important sense of the word freedom is “freedom from oppressive taxation” but in a democracy that takes care of itself. Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas by and large.
But holding up those who refuse to pay tax as folk heroes is DEFINITELY not a road you want to go down. A well-funded government is essential to a well-ordered society.
Three years in prison for three misdemeanors? Sounds like a clear case of “Evading while black”
Three years in prison for three misdemeanors? Sounds like a clear case of “Evading while black”
Fees? Fees to pay for a legal system? Are you saying that to get justice you would have to pay a fee? Or if you get burglarized you would have to pay the police officer to catch the criminal? Gee, there’s no problem with that, is there?
The level of taxation is onerous, of that there’s no doubt. There is tons of room for debate on what tax money is spent on. But the only way a democratic republic can work is if we vote on taxes and consent to paying them as voted on, with appropriate safeguards for individual rights.
Even if we could maintain security and civilization without taxation, we’d still have to vote for it. No nation can exist long if individuals can pick and choose which laws they want to obey, unless those laws are immoral. Tax laws may be bad or they may be beneficial, but they are not inherently immoral. If you choose to not pay taxes, you must suffer the appropriate consequences.
Huh? You idiots are voluntarily paying taxes? Wow. That’s mighty generous of you.
You’re not required to pay. You do realize that, right? Take a look at your tax return. Payment of taxes is voluntary in the United States. Of course, you do have to file a return reporting all of your income. You can even voluntarily pay the tax on that income if you choose.
Or not. But you must file. Otherwise, you could go to jail.
Companies are also required to withhold taxes from your paycheck. So, employers have to remit taxes to the government, but citizens do not. Citizens pay taxes voluntarily. The government can place a lien on property if you choose not to pay your taxes, so it’s important for you to not own property, but as long as you don’t own property, you are free to choose not to pay. (I don’t own my property. Another company does. That’s completely legal.)
Snipes was an idiot. He should have filed, but chose to not voluntarily pay.
That’s completely legal.
You write
“…I genuinely question the motivations of liberals today. They claim to be championing liberty…”
My experience of late has been a bit different. I have actually heard liberals complain, more than once, that there is far too much freedom in the U.S. The first time a person opined such to me, I was literally speechless. Now, I simply regard it as a reflection of the Stalinist/Fascist [take your pick] views of such folks.
Tax laws may be bad or they may be beneficial, but they are not inherently immoral.
Sorry but explain how the IRS can issue an order to confiscate your personal wealth and issue penalties before a federal trial. Explain why banks are required to report on personal transactions over $10K.
“– Snipes was an idiot. He should have filed, but chose to not voluntarily pay.
That’s completely legal. –”
They can garnish your wages and they can investigate your “company” as an illegal tax shelter. If you are making money via investment, they can freeze your investments and your bank accounts. True, you could set up some sort of parallel entity – start a LLC in your name for instance – and have all the property you use declared as company assets. But then, again, you see a host of legal issues, not the least of which is the tax on the company you’ve just set up for yourself.
Perhaps you’ve lucked out and run into some particularly dim-witted IRS agents, but I wouldn’t play by your little game. I’m more than happy to pay the financial price for living in the greatest country on earth. Stiffing the government on its due is about the most unpatriotic thing I can think of, particularly if you’re an Iraq War Cheer Leader.
Once again, I’m blown away by how some conservatives think the US Government just operates for free. That half trillion dollars we’ve spent so far in Iraq is coming out of someone’s pocket. Libertarians just don’t understand why they should have to foot the bill like everyone else.
Seriously, if you don’t like paying taxes, move to Luxenburg or the Caymen Islands or some other tax shelter nation. Why are you even in the states?
Somewhere in this thread someone mentions “taxation without representation”. Reminds me of a line from a sitcom long ago where a British maid says to her American employers, “So, now you have representation, do you like it any better”?
“Seriously, if you don’t like paying taxes, move to Luxenburg or the Caymen Islands or some other tax shelter nation.”
Who do you think you are? What makes you think that you have the moral authority to dictate the terms and conditions of other peoples’ existence like that?
*Fuck* you. I didn’t take that “love it or leave it” bullshit from Spiro Agnew, and you count for even less.
And, Dan: the right isn’t any more interested in freedom when it comes to this sort of thing than the left is. Get off it.
I guess I was too subtle in my sarcasm. I find this whole post absurd, and thought that my comments captured its absurdity. The fact that several people couldn’t tell I was joking only underscores my point.
No, Dan. You just hit a sore point.
Haha. 30 posts from a bunch of nutty tax protesters. I hope Janet Reno comes and burns down your compounds.
Ron Paul 08!!! Hahahaha!
“Issues like the above are why I genuinely question the motivations of liberals today. They claim to be championing liberty. Yet nearly everything they champion calls for more taxation and regulation.”
The Iraq War: A self-funding, unregulated enterprise?
Domestic Spying: A self-funding, unregulated enterprise? (Actually, the unregulated part is true.)
Pot Prohibition: A self-funding, unregulated enterprise?
I wonder, by what factor does useless spending on Iraq and the “War on Drugs” outweigh that of every “liberal” program combined? Double digits?
“I have actually heard liberals complain, more than once, that there is far too much freedom in the U.S.”
Yeah, sure. I always hear liberals calling for censorship.
Wait, no, I don’t. Here, I’ll play this game, too!
I have actually heard conservatives complain, more that once, that taxes and spending need to be raised. This proves they are Nazi Communists. If you disagree, you’re a Nazi Communist, too.
I don’t get why he got 3 years? Politicians, other famous people get caught all the time for not paying taxes, for years and years, and they say “oh I forgot” and they pay a penalty and it’s over.
Why is he paying his taxes and penalties and also going to prison? Is it because he didn’t lie and say “I forgot” but instead said “screw you” to the IRS?
Haha. 30 posts from a bunch of nutty tax protesters. I hope Janet Reno comes and burns down your compounds.
Ron Paul 08!!! Hahahaha!
I agree. Those evil, insidious, and freedom-hating liberals even snuck taxation into the constitution!! Not only that, but they gave the Congress the power to do all kinds of stuff with money!!
Art I Section 8:
“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
To establish post offices and post roads;
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;
To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
To provide and maintain a navy;
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;–And
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.”
It makes perfect sense that the constitution grants spending powers to the Congress without the capacity of the Congress to raise funds. Clearly the drafters of the spending powers of congress were amoral leftists who hated america.
OMG, look at the 16th amendment!!
“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”
Clearly, the 16th amendment is unconstitutional, immoral, amoral, and probably created by muslim atheist abortionist homosexuals who hate America, freedom, and family values. What’s that? You mean it was pushed by then president Taft, a conservative Republican? OMG, Teddy Roosevelt too?!
Morons
To argue against taxes is futile. Taxes are the law, and as THC above so sarcastically pointed out, they are quite constitutional.
Of course, you will pay taxes one way or another; and it is in such a way that you (involuntarily) pay fees for most government services.
And it can always be worse: we can look at Europe for how bad taxation can really get. You pay an average of $3,60 for unleaded gas now. In Germany, it is on the order of $8,60 (after converting from litres to gallons and Euros to USD).
And screen door taxes in the UK; and TV taxes in the UK and Japan; and so on…
By and large, we really have it good in this country.
Facts aside, though… modern liberals really do love their socialist schemes to re-distribute everyone’s income around (with a very large portion of it going into their pockets, or their earmarks for federal pork projects when they are seated in the halls of power) and especially so out of whatever sense of “white guilt” they use to keep their minority constituencies enslaved to the party line.
They also take great joy in trying to coerce everyone else into following their (mostly hare-brained) mandates, thinking that they have the right and moral (yet relativist) authority to march everyone along to the oppressive beat of their Stalinist drum.
Libertarians – and especially the small-government small “c” conservatives prefer a government that stays in its proper sphere of public defense (not assault, and especially in foreign nations), regulating interstate trade and trade with other sovereign nations. We also like our tax money to be put to use to rebuild and maintain our roads and rails, and not pay addle-brained absinthe drinkers to drop crucifixes into vials of urine and call it “art”.
Some disagreement will likely ensue over the definitions of “rights” vs. privileges, where the enumerated rights to the people in the US Constitution do not include “rights to free and universal medical care” or the “right to murder unborn babies without cause”.
Actually though, Life is Not Fair™, and as much as I love our United States and our Constitution, it too, shall pass from history in due course. I shall endeavour to do all within my power to see that it — and our freedoms — remain, and pay my taxes without complaint, as my Lord commanded me.
But when at last this Republic does pass away, and its Constitution nothing more than a cheapened piece of parchment much like the old Soviet constitution or the Red Chinese constitution — along with whatever freedoms the liberals (or the NeoCons, who are in reality nothing much more than repackaged Trotskyites) take from us, I shall only rejoice in the liberty from the penalty of sin which Christ gave us.
For our kingdom is not of this world.
“– Who do you think you are? What makes you think that you have the moral authority to dictate the terms and conditions of other peoples’ existence like that?
*Fuck* you. I didn’t take that “love it or leave it” bullshit from Spiro Agnew, and you count for even less. –”
Shit, I’m sorry but complaining about taxes makes about as much sense as complaining about gravity. You don’t get something for nothing. Every government service – be it Medicare or Highways or War – costs money. That money comes from tax payers. And while you can wax on and off about the merits of the private sector versus the public trust, we will still need health care and a transportation infrastructure and a standing military.
If you don’t want health care or highways or soldiers, move to a country that doesn’t provide them. But if you’re on the public doll, and we all are in one way or another, quit your endless bitching about paying the bills. I can see you having this conversation with the electric company – “How dare you cut off my power! I have the right to an endless supply of free energy as provided by someone other than me.”
You live in a community, a democracy. That means everyone gets to dictate how everyone else lives. That’s reality, and it doesn’t exactly go away when you remove the superstructure of government. Get rid of the police and the justice system and the legislature. You will still have neighbors. They’ll still have an impact on your life – directly or indirectly – and there is nothing you can do about it. But this constant whining about living in civilization is nauseating. Uou whole heartedly insist that you – alone – could do better than the rest of the country combined, if only people wouldn’t make you cough up a few grand a year for public services.
If you don’t want to live in civilization, then leave. No one is keeping you here. If you want to bicker about policy, that’s one thing. But asking to simply cash out and sit on your ass makes you look like a spoiled child. Do you want your taxes back in US Dollars or should we just give you 40 acres and a mule? Once you’ve declared yourself a sovereign tax-free nation unto yourself, will you be bitching when your sovereign next door neighbor beats you up and takes your stuff? Do you plan on substance farming for a living and never leaving your little plot of land? Good god, better not plan to breed, cause then reality will really start taking a 2×4 to your head. Outside this little anarchist’s utopia you’ve built for yourself, will you be bothering the rest of us socialist hippies? I hope not.
Hey, Harpo, Mr. Ever, Moe, you need to read Mr. Convervative’s post on the Constitution (above). It reminds you idiots who in the government is really responsible for the economy, stupid, and most every other government function. It is the Congress, not Bush. Thanks for showing these liberal pinheads up, Mr. Conservative.
First of all which definition of “freedom” are you referring to: exemption from external control and regulation; the power to determine without restraint; or political /national independence?? Depending on which you definition you choose the answer is very different.
Regardless, total freedom from any restraint , control or regulation equals chaos.For example with “total freedomn” we’d become a nation where if someone didn’t like something his neighbor did, just shoot him.
Furthermore, without taxation what would fund the military? And would you be willing to have zero control over imported food and medicines? Probably not. Fees? ummmm… ok, I’ll pay $3 for this pill, $20 to inspect my hamburger….
The fact of the matter is that in a SOCIETY ,a body of individuals living as members of a community, total personal freedom is unattainable and in my opinion, undesirable.
This argument *against* taxes is really an argument *for* a system of medieval feudalism. That’s what conservatives want. Think indentured servitude, company stores, and debtors prisons are bad things? They sound pretty good to elitist conservatives, because after all, with such a system they will get paid, and fuck everyone else. It’s a perfect system for such elites. For example, they profit from wars and all that come with them, while everyone BUT them pays the costs; create the department of homeland security – the most bloated, ineffective government agency on record, not to actually provide homeland security, but to think up ways of handing out sweet contracts to and from the elites; commit unlawful acts with the assistance of corporate telecoms and then push for deregulation and telecom immunity as rewards, and as a means of further covering up those unlawful acts; hire your pals to provide “security” in Iraq and cloak them in immuninty as well; etc. etc.
These are standard *socialize the risk – privatize the profts* models, consistent with conservative “governance” since the Reagan era. The model doesn’t change – merely the means of looting the treasury and sending the U.S. back to the dark ages must evolve. The Iraq war is their greatest success in the sense that there is a never-ending source of money provided by a cowardly congress, and they will never have to pay one red cent in support of it.
It seems to me that a number of respondents are reading an “any and all taxes are unjustified” extremism into Dan’s post that I don’t see in what he wrote. Certainly some amount of taxation is necessary, but how much is reasonable and how much is excessive? If any criticism of policy that consistently “calls for more taxation and regulation”, without seeming to acknowledge any troubling implications for economic liberty therein, is sufficient to get one reflexively tarred and feathered as a misanthropic anarchist, it’s hard to see how we as a country will ever be able to have a meaningful discussion of the subject.
Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s?
You guys can’t even live up to your own code. Patriots complaining about Wesley Snipes–you’re breaking all your own rules it’s hilarious
This speaks to exactly why I’ve moved from the uninformed liberal I was in College, to the slightly more informed conservative I am today.
The other paradox that I struggle with is the union of social conservatives (We can legislate what you do in your bedrooms, marriages, and private life) with the notion of restrained government conservatism. Again, combining these two notions is inherently paradoxical and I struggle to explain to my less conservative peers how they can exist in the same party.
I suppose we must all have our hypocrisy.
“— Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s? —”
I have no problem with that. It’s a biblical command.
But unlike Imperial Rome, we here in the USA have some (limited) say as to what Caesar does with that money we give him.
Many of us would prefer not to see it squandered, laundered, or given to programs to assuage feeling of supposed “white guilt”.
As for the SoCons seeking to control people’s lives behind closed doors – well, that should be best left alone.
However, when you start to parade perversion around public and insist that the rest of us are bigots or support “hate crimes” for choosing not to celebrate your twisted sense of diversity, that is a different matter.
I see no reason for (my share) of the public treasury to support the pornography and vileness passed off as “art” or the marriage of homosexuals or the enforcement of abnormal familial constructs (Heather’s two mommies or Dave’s two daddies, or ployamory) as valid, against over 6,000 years of civilized society teaching us that male-female marriage is the proper way to form a family.
“Many of us would prefer not to see it squandered, laundered, or given to programs to assuage feeling of supposed “white guilt”.”
Sure, and many of *us* understand that your constant mischaracterization of the intent of social programs is at best misguided and at worst dishonest. Many of *us* perfer that our tax dollars don’t go toward never-ending follies in the desert, and to the GOP’s elitist corporate cronies, airline bailouts, oil subsidies, farm subsidies, disasterous abstinence only education, bloated “faith based” initiatives, auto subsidies, telecom subsidies, steel subsidies, coal subsidies, corporate welfare, “missle defense” programs that continue to fail, a “virtual fence” that contines to fail, etc.
Moreover, *your* money doesn’t go in any significant way to same sex marriage, just like *your* money doesn’t go to heterosexual marriage; and it doesn’t go to promote “abnormal family constructs” whatever that means, and you know it. Moreover, if you want a government that always spends according to your delicate sensibilities and values, move to a theocracy. The government doesn’t exist to validate your preening superstitions. Get over yourself.
On the other hand, many of *us” would prefer to use tax money to keep *our* country from slipping into the dark ages.
“On the other hand, many of *us” would prefer to use tax money to keep *our* country from slipping into the dark ages.”
Uh-huh, and that’s the reason you support the savages in the ME who are trying to do just that, primitize the World. What a fuc…. hypocrite.
And drop that misnomer you use. You’re about as conservative as Teddy Kennedy, and about as obnoxious as well.
“– Many of us would prefer not to see it squandered, laundered, or given to programs to assuage feeling of supposed “white guilt”. –”
You keep tossing out this term “white guilt” like its a deciding factor in modern legislation. Equal protection under law dictates that – in instances like the Lily Ledbetter case – people should have the right to confront wrongdoing and address grievances fairly. When the SCOTUS steps in and demands that only upper management – people with access to the information necessary to know they are being discriminated against – have the right to sue for sex or race discrimination, they are denying millions of Americans the civil liberties afforded to their tenured neighbors. When the GOP legislators step in to uphold this travesty, they’re basically abusing the intent of the law. This has nothing to do with “guilt” and everything to do with constructing a sound legal system.
Likewise, when states pass laws against crimes and raise the penalty if it is particularly racial or sexual in nature, we are not taking a stand based on our native race. Crimes of a racial or sexual nature are considered particularly heinous in our society. You wouldn’t approve of a judicial system that labeled rape as just another form of physical assault. You wouldn’t approve of a judicial system that labeled pre-meditated murder as just another form of homicide. Why would you consider a burning cross in the yard of a black civic leader just another form of vandalism?
And after billions lost in highway scandals (Bridge to Nowhere), and pedophilia scandals (DHS officials caught with pre-teen porn), and contractor scandals (KBR raping overseas employees, the GAO exposed $285 billion Defense Department overage) to talk about how Democrats can’t spend responsibly is absolutely laughable. If you care about wasteful government spending, you only seem to protest when a Democrat does it. Republican wasteful spending will not raise your ire and change your vote.
“– As for the SoCons seeking to control people’s lives behind closed doors – well, that should be best left alone. –”
Except that it isn’t. Time and again you vote for “true Christian” conservatives at the forefront of the culture war as they try to ban this Harry Potter book or shield employers from laying off that group of gay employees or pass another ridiculous “illegal sex acts” ordinance that tries to legislate how far from the missionary position a couple is allowed to deviate from in the bedroom.
Your votes mark you as a liar, Seek. You talk a good talk and make a great deal of sensible, moderate noises, then run off and vote for the most radical, corrupt, and invasive political platforms on the menu. You’re like a declared vegan that only orders red meat. And its completely transparent.
If you don’t like the Bush Admin policies, stop voting for them. If you don’t want to be wire tapped or have your tax money squandered, quit throwing support behind the same old crooks. Find an alternative candidate – in a primary or in the general – and quit coming back to the Bush/McCain policies because they’re a protest vote against “white guilt”.
“– Uh-huh, and that’s the reason you support the savages in the ME who are trying to do just that, primitize the World. –”
Dumbass. Have you even seen pictures of Middle Eastern cities? Al-Jazera is trying to primitize the world? The mini-malls of Kuwait are “savage”? Satellite dishes on half the houses in Iraq are out of the dark ages? Dubai much?
This is why you’re losing your little war. You don’t even know who you’re fighting against. Running off to fight a new generation of Crusades against a bunch of otherwise amiable Muslim farmers and blue collars and office workers who just want you to stop dropping bombs on their heads and driving tanks through their streets.
The very idea that a “primitive” people are going to travel half way around the world to bring down western civilization is perhaps the height of absurdity. A thousand 9/11s wouldn’t be enough to primitize the United States. But it only took one for us to through away our civil liberties and piss away our tax dollars on scandal and fraud. That nefarious Osama bin Laden tricked us into voting Republican. He got us good.
There is more than one way to “assuage white guilt”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projection_bias
“— Sure, and many of *us* understand that your constant mischaracterization of the intent of social programs is at best misguided and at worst dishonest. —”
Indeed? But some of you liberals would rather pump even more money into them, in a self-righteous attempt to play Robin Hood, by stealing from the producers and giving it to the non-producers. Encourage people and give them the tools to become producers, yes. But multi-generation welfare programs are a shame to the recipients, and a drag on our economy; “affirmative action” denies access to those whose talents and efforts might have otherwise made major contributions to society whilst keeping a particular group of Americans beholden to party interests.
“— Many of *us* perfer that our tax dollars don’t go toward never-ending follies in the desert… —”
As do I. But we are already there, albeit unconstitutionally so. We need to set some closed-ended, time-sensitive goals that are both reasonable and reachable, and bring those troops home. Sooner better than later. And while we are at it, reduce our commitments of troops to over 130 other countries to a total of perhaps just South Korea, Japan and our overseas possessions in order to be able to defend against the rising Red Chinese menace.
“— and to the GOP’s elitist corporate cronies, … —”
If by that you mean no-bid contracts and appropriation of funds by the DHS for john-boats and pallet-loads of “dog booties” for drug/bomb-sniffing dogs, among other such things, then yes, you’re right.
“— airline bailouts, … —”
Disagreeable, yes… but how else might we maintain air travel in this country? I hope you don’t propose nationalizing the airline industry (at least for domestic carriers). Or better yet, let people take trains (oops! that would mean pumping money in the national rail franchise, AMTRAK) or rental cars (more taxes to keep the roads from falling apart). I for one am a fan of the Japanese shinkansen (bullet trains) that go 500kph for considerably less energy per person than an airplane or a car, but that’s just me.
Perhaps a tax rebate for frequent air travelers from a pool commensurate with existing subsidies, with a commensurate increase in airfares to let the people subsidize their own air travel? Or perhaps coming up with a better model for air travel to be determined by the market.
“— oil subsidies, … —”
A necessary evil, given the rarity of the stuff. Or do you want to imitate your idol Hugo Chavez, and nationalize the oil industry too?
“— farm subsidies, … —”
The ethanol boondoggle will certain starve us – or put most of us in the poorhouse for our food bill – if somebody doesn’t wake up.
“— disasterous (sic) abstinence only education, … —”
The failure here is long reaching. It began with the destabilizing influence of godless atheists who demanded that any notion of moral absolutes (much less the teaching of God’s Word in schools) be thrown out in the 1960′s.
That raised a generation of kids, now parents (and some of that generation now on the cusp of being grandparents) of kids growing up now who have know knowledge of God, no knowledge of proper roles and behaviour for young men and women.
Abstinence education fails not because of the content, but because of the lack of moral fiber and backbone once cherished by our forefathers — and most importantly, a lack of knowing Jesus Christ.
The best solution would be two-pronged:
Churches need to teach the spiritual basis on WHY abstinence is important;
Parents and schools need to teach that abstinence is the ONLY safe and guaranteed method of preventing transmission of STDs and unplanned pregnancies. They also need to discuss the biomechanics of reproduction with their children frankly, to INCLUDE knowledge about contraception/STD prevention, with emphasis put on the destructive affects of pre-marital (or at least pre-adult) casual sex.
Just giving kids contraceptives and telling them to “play safe” is nothing more but an endorsement of (pre)teen sex. And before you turn my arguments for liberty against me as touching “children’s liberty”, I will say to you that children (minors) have no liberty in the adult sense of self-determination: they are under the dominion and authority of their parents and legal guardians.
Likewise, parent and guardians who neglect to use their authority to correctly discipline their children in a sound and godly way are guaranteed to raise bad, brutish children who will have great likelihood of becoming burdens, if not menaces, to society.
“— bloated “faith based” initiatives, … —”
I don’t see so many of them, but the idea of it seems sound — to allow churches and charitable organizations to pick up some of the burden of caring for the poor and widows and orphans.
“— auto subsidies, … —”
If left to themselves, as they should have been under a market economy, the Big Three automakers should have folded or been bought out by the superior Japanese and German makers decades ago… or better still, allowed for new American car makers to arise with new innovations, such as the Aptera car, or compressed air cars.
“— telecom subsidies, steel subsidies, coal subsidies, corporate welfare, … —”
Some good, some bad. One could argue that the commodities and service crucial to our security and infrastructure are as equally – if not more important – than questionable social programs or supersizing the government.
I suspect though, that you like “Ma Bell monopolism”, or worse, Marxist style command economics much better. Such things can be much more stifling to innovation and creativity as well as freedom-limiting; and when we boil it down to its essence, modern liberalism is much more about hating individual freedom and maximizing state control. You Marxists have attempted to supplant God with the “state”, and are too stupidly sheeplike to realize that it has failed every single time.
“— missle (sic) defense programs that continue to fail, a virtual fence that contines (sic) to fail, etc. —”
I recall the Patriot Missile system and its successors worked rather well; but the virtual wall will never do as well as a physical wall patrolled by armed defenders with the will and ability to punish transgressors.
“— Moreover, *your* money doesn’t go in any significant way to same sex marriage, just like *your* money doesn’t go to heterosexual marriage; and it doesn’t go to promote “abnormal family constructs” whatever that means, and you know it. —”
Oh, no! Are you ignorant, or do you really work hard at being stupid? *My* money gets pooled into a big fat general account, just like yours does. But my taxes – just like yours – gets to be divvied up into such nice bits of legislation that I don’t assent to. Typically, you liberals like to push the gay agenda as they are a particularly loud constituency that betrays their small numbers…
… and since we are all banking on a sweeping Dem victory in both houses of Congress and the presidency, that means come 20 Jan. 2009, you’ll not be able to tell me otherwise that your government will use public funds to support all sorts of wicked agendas which rise as an unholy stench to Jehovah God’s nostrils.
“— Moreover, if you want a government that always spends according to your delicate sensibilities and values, move to a theocracy. The government doesn’t exist to validate your preening superstitions. Get over yourself. —”
I’ll turn that around, you knavish bumpkin, and tell you that if you want a government that wants to suppress individual liberties and “mandate” how everyone does everything during every waking moment, then move to a Marxist nation like Red China or North Korea or Cuba. Or if that doesn’t suit your fancy, there are socres of European Social Democratcies. Better hurry and file for your immigration visas though, I’m giving “Eurabia” another ten years before it is completely Islamized… in which case your liberal sensibilities and vain, and overbearing paternalism won’t matter a whit as a dhimmi.
Snipes deserves every minute of that sentence. Unless one believes that all taxation is immoral, Snipes is unquestionably a criminal.
He didn’t just fail to file a few documents on time, or underpay by a small amount. He is a very wealthy man who systematically tried to evade the tax obligations his wealth incurred. In this effort he resorted to blatantly fraudulent methods and compelled the tax authorities to expend large sums just to collect what he should have paid in the first place. He was a committed, systematic, and habltual evader. Yes, his tax obligations were large – but still only a fraction of his enormous income. That income was possible because the U.S. is what it is, including all the things government does, such as law enforcement and national defense.
Many rich people want to evade taxation; and because they are rich, they can afford to employ the sort of complicated schemes that Snipes did. The poor and middle class can’t pay $50,000 for a bogus investment loss. To say that Snipes should get off is to say that rich people should be allowed to evade taxation at will.
Snipes should go to jail pour encourager les autres.
“— Crimes of a racial or sexual nature are considered particularly heinous in our society. You wouldn’t approve of a judicial system that labeled rape as just another form of physical assault. You wouldn’t approve of a judicial system that labeled pre-meditated murder as just another form of homicide. Why would you consider a burning cross in the yard of a black civic leader just another form of vandalism? —”
I wouldn’t. I would call it “aggravated vandalism with an intent to intimidate”, and that act would no longer be considered free speech.
As for rapists and sex offenders – especially those who sexually assault children, I believe that they should face a mandatory sentence: the death penalty.
And that goes the same for murder-1 convicts:
“—- …so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree: His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance. —–”
(Deuteronomy 21:21b-23, KJV)
What really bothers me about Snipes’s sentence is that he got 3 years for 3 misdemeanor convictions. FOR MISDEMEANORS !!!!! It appears crystal clear to me that what happened here is that the US Attorney’s office, and apparently the judge, were pissed off that the jury acquitted him of the felonies and they decided to show those jurors who is really in charge and give Snipes a felony level sentence. Seriously, who gets 3 years on a misdemeanor? That is a felony sentence. So basically we have a US Attorney and a US District Judge overruling a jury. They completely ignored the fact that the jury acquitted Snipes of the felony charges and gave him as close to the felony sentence as they could.
No doubt the US Attorney disgreed with the jury’s verdict. However, the decision was the jury’s to make, not the prosecutor’s. I assert that by handing down a 3 year sentence that is generally only seen in felony cases the judge violated Snipes’s right to a trial by jury.
Here we have a glaring example of the federal government abusing a citizen. I have trouble even typing out the word ‘citizen’ considering how our government treats us like ‘subjects’, not ‘citizens’.
“— Your votes mark you as a liar, Seek. You talk a good talk and make a great deal of sensible, moderate noises, then run off and vote for the most radical, corrupt, and invasive political platforms on the menu. You’re like a declared vegan that only orders red meat. And its completely transparent.
If you don’t like the Bush Admin policies, stop voting for them. —”
You’d probably be surprised to learn that I supported and voted for a Democrat – actually two of them – in 2006. And they had positions that were opposed to what the GOP consensus was on the war (if you read my blog, you’d know that I’ve been fairly consistent against the *unconstitutionality* of this war, though the only way I can possibly find support for it in terms of relieving the suffering of the Iraqis under the murderous regime of Saddam Hussein)
And do I support resisting the advance of Islamification? I do, but have come to the conclusion that it will be the duty of the host nations involved (speaking primarily of “Eurabia”). Yet our fight to resist being overtaken by radical Islam should better be taken on our own shores.
Thanks for assuming!
Anywho, I will most likely support the Constitutionalist candidate (depending upon who he/she is) or the libertarians (Bob Barr).
I can’t see myself supporting any of the three knuckleheads currently occupying the media spotlight. They all support positions I cannot abide by in part or in whole.
“– Seriously, who gets 3 years on a misdemeanor? That is a felony sentence. So basically we have a US Attorney and a US District Judge overruling a jury. They completely ignored the fact that the jury acquitted Snipes of the felony charges and gave him as close to the felony sentence as they could. –”
They threw the maximum sentence available to them. How is maxing out a sentence the same as dismissing a jury. He was convicted on three counts and punished for three counts. And he wasn’t evading a few hundred bucks. He wasn’t evading a few grand. He was evading for millions of dollars. The US Government threw the book at him because he threw the book at the US Government. He was totally unrepentant and convicted as charged. If he’d gotten convicted of a felony and they maxed out his sentence then, would you be complaining that they’re charging him with a higher level felony than he’d been charged with?
Snipes will have plenty of opportunities to appeal his conviction. If the sentence was overly harsh, I’m confident he’ll have it overturned. He clearly doesn’t mind spending millions on lawyers, even if he objects to spending millions on taxes.
Fact of the matter is, that those millions will get spent regardless. Sadly, it will go into the hands of lawyers rather than paying for cost of running government.
“– Anywho, I will most likely support the Constitutionalist candidate (depending upon who he/she is) or the libertarians (Bob Barr).
I can’t see myself supporting any of the three knuckleheads currently occupying the media spotlight. They all support positions I cannot abide by in part or in whole. –”
Sorry if I’m browbeating you. I’m just tired of seeing the same old “boo hoo Ross Perot” game played time and again. I would have been about as happy to see Perot getting the nod as Clinton back in ’92. Neither of them had spotless records, but they were both better than more of the same. Then I saw the entire libertarian movement collapse because the GOP beat them up over losing. So all the libertarian voters I knew started voting for these ridiculous big-government, tax-cut-and-spend, fiscally irresponsible SoCons who’d managed to combine all the porking of Beltway Dems with a nanny-state social agenda that made me sick. Lieberman and Clinton and – to a lesser degree – Al Gore weren’t any better on the bullshit “micro-issues” like regulating rap music and pokemon cards. I’m sick of the entire social agenda, and I’m tired of people who also complain about the social agenda voting for the same old social tyrants because this one promises medicare and that one promises tax cuts.
Ron Paul promised tax cuts without taking a moral crusade down your pants. Obama has plans for net neutrality that don’t involve cracking down on bit torrent or prying through people’s email. Social libertarians exist in the political sphere – I don’t know much about Bob Barr, but I’ll look him up – and they should be getting a bigger share of the vote. :p
So, after ’92, I’m really skeptical of the “libertarian” when he runs off and votes for DeLay or Dolittle or Santorum or Jeb Bush. Call me cynical like that. But if you’re honestly voting Constitution Party, you’ve got my vote Seek.
You’re a dumbass, Riehl, but your faithful commenters are every bit as dumb as you. None of you clowns are worth a damn.
Boy, you nailed this one Dan.
From the pen of that mighty conservative icon Henry David Thoreau to your keyboard!
Does anybody know if the sentence is consecutive or concurrent?
I see that you patriots are each getting $600 from your brave leader. What will you buy with it? Yellow ribbon magnets? 87 octane gas? Nascar collectibles?
Thank you for your service!
Is the Maximum Sentence the Same as Getting Off Easy?
TigerHawk tells us that by receiving only a 3 year sentence Wesley Snipes got off easy:And for my fellow libertarian conservatives who are offended, I offer the friendly reminder that Pete Rose served five months in federal prison for defaulting…
Moe (IslamoLlama) is an unrepentant purveyor of the Big Lies. His/her comments come with several embedded, or at least one. Here is one for your examination:
“This is why you’re [He means the USA Republican Administration. This is not a trivial mistake but another outright falsehood, because the Congress, even with a Democraticic majority, has continued to vote to support the war] losing your little war.”
It is a little war compared with some we have had. But the fact is we are winning it.
Actually, Fred, the war is won, and it’s about time to come home. I hate to agree with some of these libs, but we’ve seen the Iraqi Army handle JAM pretty well over the past three weeks. We should leave our air assets and some advisors, but the bulk of the troops should be on the way home within the next year. The Iraqis need to stand on their on two feet, and realize that they can accomplish more together than they ever can fighting each other. Of course, Iran wants to get in the mix, but we can shift some troops to the border with Iran and stop most of the mischief from the Iranians.
“Dumbass, have you seen pictures of the ME cities?”
I guess being called a dumbass by you should be considered a compliment, given that most of what you say can be interpreted by someone with common sense to be just the opposite. Anyway, let me be more concise.
The Northwest Frontier of Pakistan, the entire nation of Afghanistan, and large parts of Iraq, which are the places we currently are fighting in, are very primitive. Much of the primitization in these areas(parts of Iraq and almost all of Afghanistan) has either been caused by radical Islam(sharia law, if you will), or radical Islam prevents the normal development of these areas. For instance, these Islamic fighters and leaders prevent such things as vaccinations for children, the playing of music, celebrations of any kind, women’s rights, and a host of other things I don’t have time to write about just now, but I would be glad to expound on in a later post, if you don’t get the message.
As for some of the other places in the ME, yes, there has been tremendous development, but I was not referring to these places. I should have made my comment a little more clear, I suppose, but I thought most educated people would know we were not fighting in Dubai, the UAE, Kuwait or Saudi Arabia.
FWIW, the only reason why Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Dubai, UAE, et al. are as advanced as they are has nothing at all to do with the virulently anti-modern and anti-civilizing influences of the radical forms of Islam held by a great majority of those peoples.
It has everything to do with all that shiny black goo buried under thousands of feet of sand that they happen to rule over, which everyone wants.
Were it not for that, you can rest assured that they would be materially in the seventh century as much as they are spiritually.
“Actually, Fred, the war is won, and it’s about time to come home.”
Hahaha!! When there are no more other options, declare victory and cut and run!! Hahahaha!!! Thank you for your service, oil baron/troop-breeder!!!
Thank you, boob, thank you very much. Your support for your country and soldiers has overwhelmed me. And thank you for all your support over the past few months. I would love to thank you in person. I’ll be in NYC the week of May 5-10. I’ll buy you a drink at the Pierre Hotel, where I’ll be staying.
“Much of the primitization in these areas(parts of Iraq and almost all of Afghanistan) has either been caused by radical Islam(sharia law, if you will)”
…
“but I thought most educated people would know we were not fighting in Dubai, the UAE, Kuwait or Saudi Arabia.”
The irony is that Kuwait and Saudi Arabia are more controlled by Sharia law than Iraq was under Hussein.
This once again proves that when a wingnut opens his mouth about the world outside, he usually has no idea what he’s talking about.
Actually, Temp, a blogger, unfortunately I do not recall which one, recently pointed out that Iraq II is actually Iraqs II and III. Iraq II was against Saddam and his regime. That war has clearly been won. Saddam and his regime are history. Iraq III is the guerrilla war or insurgent war we are now winning but still fighting and rightly so. I don’t think we at home are in any position to state it is time to come home. Only the military and civilian authorities on the ground should make that determination and submit it to the President for approval.
A short search showed this is the blog I referred to, The Jawa Report:
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/192340.php
“Iraq III is the guerrilla war or insurgent war we are now winning”
OK, Einstein.
Just who are these “guerrillas”. And please tell me about other successful guerrilla wars.
Hint. The occupiers win every battle. Go broke, then go home defeated.
I figure we’re at least half way home.
“The irony is that Kuwait and Saudi Arabia are more controlled by Sharia law than Iraq was under Hussein.”
I doubt whether Kuwait was, but I’ll give you Saudi Arabia. There were other reasons given for going into Iraq that had nothing to do with Sharia law, or the primitization of large parts of the ME. The fact that radicalization of Islam and primitization of large parts of the ME go hand in hand has quite escaped you. Imagine that.
And naturally, much of what you have said proves that when a nutroot opens his mouth, it’s either to lie or to support our enemies, or in many cases both.
Disagreeing with stupid policies doesn’t make you a supporter of the enemies of our country.
What’s “primitization” mean?
The Iraq I/II/III argument simply proves the administration had no understanding of Iraq, it’s history, or the consequences of removing Saddam from power.
rofl support our enemies? Kinda like how the Iraq war funding is giving money to people who are now or will shoot at us with the guns we gave them. But yeah, it’s the liberals who support our enemy… wingnuts know nothing about how the world works.
Kuwait is ruled by Islamic law. Do some freaking research. They are modernizing somewhat–just gave women the right to vote, but are still one of the most religiously conservative countries in the world. It’s funny how you wingnuts pick and choose your enemies based on who W days the evildoer du jour is. It’s like you have no mind of your own, i mean, we’re talking on the internet and you couldn’t even research for yourself if Kuwait was controlled by Islamic Law. You can’t even help yourself learn new things–truly a sign of how ignorant old wingnuts are on the internet.
http://WWW.GOOGLE.COM
try it someday old man, before you die
templarnut logic 101:
It’s great that we invaded Iraq and liberated people from a primitive culture and sharia law.
–Actually Iraq was one of the most secular ME countries prior to our invasion, and will likely see an expansion of Islamic law regardless of what happens in the future.–
Well, um, er, It was still a good idea, because I like seeing dead muslims and you’re emboldening our primitivizatived enemies by making me look like an idiot so SHUT UP
nutroot logic 101:
When you can’t defend the indefensible–LIE
When you have no idea what you’re talking about–LIE.
And by all means, when you know nothing–LIE some more.
And by the way, your interpretation of what is said is just that–nutroot interpretation.
Nutroot interpretation 101a–build a straw man and knock it down, then proclaim yourself intelligent.
Nutroot interpretation 101b–make shit up, attribute it to whomever, and then argue with the nutroot interpretation.
Nutroot interpretation 101c–LIE.
LOL–nutroot.
“try it someday old man, before you die”
Hahaha, I might just outlive you, boob. In any event, if statistics hold true, I’ll be around another 40 or so years.
templar,
It is quite simple to save face here.
1) Admit you were wrong
2) Admit the GOP has hoodwinked folks like into voting against their own best interest.
3) Vote the crooked lying bastards out of office.
Everyone will be happy and America will be a better place for all of us.
And safer too.
“It is quite simple to save face here.”
1)Wrong about what?
2)I don’t vote the GOP on a straight ticket. I’m a registered independent, although I used to be a Democrat.
3)It will do no good to vote more crooked lying bastards like the Democrats are fielding into office, as it will just get worse.
Putting nutroots in charge will do nothing to make America safer or happier. You are deluded if you think so.
1)Wrong about what?
Sharia law and primitization.
3)It will do no good to vote more crooked lying bastards like the Democrats are fielding into office, as it will just get worse.
So I guess you’re in favor of the 100 year war.
And continuing deficits?
And no health care care reform.
And you and I paying a higher tax rate rate than Warren Buffet?
You, my friend are voting against your own best interest.
Where was I wrong about Sharia law and primitization? Show me where I was wrong, or will you go with the nutroot interpretations of what I said? Which will it be, what I said, or the nutroot interpretation of what I said? I’m beginning to think you’re a nutroot yourself, jharp.
“Show me where I was wrong”
“I doubt whether Kuwait was”
Kuwait was and is.
Though that is not the most important issue.
What is though, is folks voting against their own best interest and I suspect you are one of them.
Though you might not be thrilled with the dems it is no contest as to whose policies are in the best interest of 95% of us.
Hell, son, you said earlier that everyone would be happy, and now you’re down to 95%, which is just something you pulled out of your ass. More nutroot numbers and interpretations. I have a gut feeling that whoever the nutroot candidate may be, he or she is not likely to get anywhere near that kind of vote. But hey, let’s not allow facts to get in the way of nutroot interpretations.
http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_2_cultural_jihadists.html
The above is a link to an excellent and inclusive summary of how Western educators, media executives, and politicians are betraying the values of Western liberty because they are afraid of…guess who…Islamo-terrorists.
templar,
You missed my point.
“policies are in the best interest of 95% of us.”
Of course no one will get 95% of the vote.
“Saddam also created a Western-style legal system, making Iraq the only country in the Persian Gulf region not ruled according to traditional Islamic law (Sharia). Saddam abolished the Sharia law courts, except for personal injury claims.”
I just love it when people, meaning your commenters, try to define my or anyone’s “liberalism” with their interpretation of it. That’s rather disengenious not to mention flat out lazy thinking. Don’t tell me what I believe as a liberal. I believe what I believe and my beliefs are my own. That being said, remember this: one of the facets of liberalism is “for the common good” and taxation is in that category. How else to pay for your fantastic occupation of Iraq? (Without borrowing from China that is!) That’s why we’re not crying over Snipes incarceration. He got what he deserved. Being black has nothing to do with it either, another indication of lazy thinking for those who want to interject what, exactly?
“Isn’t it amazing how conservative economic policy always converges on some variant of “Give the rich more money,” and ends with some version of, “And this will help the middle class and the poor.” They just never get around to filling in that middle part with anything coherent. The clever cons know it’s a scam. This is what a lot of grassroots conservatives, mostly the duller or more ignorant ones to be sure, really believe.”
“policies are in the best interest of 95% of us.”
Forgot to add that most of dullard conservatives actually believe they are in the top 5%.
One hell of a sales job. That, I must admit.
“Isn’t it amazing how conservative economic policy always converges on some variant of ‘Give the rich more money’, and ends with some version of, ‘And this will help the middle class and the poor’.”
What is amazing to me is that you, educated as you are, don’t know that the government is not “giving” the rich more money. The money belongs to whomever, they worked for it, and the government is “taking” it from them. Hardly a gift, my boy.
Of course, no less a patronage than Winston Churchill said, “Capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings, socialism is the equal sharing of misery”. I always go with the blessings, there is enough misery in life without adding any extra.
templar,
If you subtract a negative, it is the same as adding.
And Mr. No Taxes. Just how do you propose we pay our bills?
Like the $4 trillion the current administration just pissed away.
I point out a nutroot propaganda ploy, and I get accused of being Mr. No Taxes. And no, Mr. Nutroot, not taxing someone is not the same thing as giving them something. What is so difficult about this concept for you to understand? In other words, to make it easy for you, not taking something that belongs to someone is not the same thing as giving them something. One is by force, the other is not.
Templar,
You say tax cuts are not giving. I say they are. Specifically when they are disproportional cut to favor the wealthiest Americans.
But does it really matter what we call it?
Taxes are here to stay and we need to find a way to pay our bills.
Do you like paying a higher rate than Warren Buffett?
“Do you like paying a higher rate than Warren Buffett?”
We always will so why whine about it?
“We always will so why whine about it?”
As long as the republicans are in charge, I agree.
I plan on doing something about it. Like voting them out of office.
You’ve never voted a Republican in office, jharp. So you’re not doing anything you don’t always do, and I’m smart enough to know that Warren Buffet will always pay a lesser rate of taxes than me because he can pay an army of accountants millions of dollars to take advantage of loopholes his cronies in Congress have put in tax law just for people like him. Democrats are no different. They put loopholes in laws that favor their friends, so voting for a Democrat will change nothing as far as Warren Buffet is concerned. I’ll still pay a higher percentage of tax.
The only way to rectify the problem would be to have a flat tax with no deductions, and you Dems would have none of that. So don’t act as if your side has tax honesty. When it comes to taxes, the rich have the advantages, whether they be Republicans or Democrats.
Wahoo will at times defend Harpo. My opinion is that Harpo is not capable of being defended. That is what I find so offensive about Harpo. Look at this statement by this incorrigible dope, for example:
“Like the $4 trillion the current administration just pissed away.
Posted by: jharp | Monday, April 28, 2008 at 04:51 PM”
Over and over again he has been shown that this statement is incorrect, that it cannot be true under our form of constitutional government. Links have been provided for his convenience. Yet he persists. He goes on, untroubled in his conscience.
At least Moe, LOL, Boob and our other friends, when they, on those so rare occasions, are confronted with incontrovertible refutations will change the subject or use some other device to slip out of the noose. Oh sure they may days later go back to the SOS, but at least they wait for some of the sting to go away. But not friend Harpo. Oh no, Harpo is oblivious to truth, has no shame, and will jump back in with both feet 15 minutes afterward. That is why I believe Harpo has zero sincerity and is dishonest.
“Wahoo will at times defend Harpo.”
Now Fred old friend I prefer to think that I ‘defend’ everyone occasionally around here when I think someone misunderstands them.