• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CBS News Poll: Most Oppose GOP Tax Plan

Harshaw said:
Hardly the point. Anyone is welcome to try to change things as they feel appropriate. Here, I thought "love it or leave it" was a scandalous thing said to noble peace marchers in the '60s.
Click to expand...

For many it should be the point.
 
haymarket said:
Its a good thing that the people who created this nation were not so fixated and risk adverse.
Click to expand...

:rofl

You'd have told them "if you don't like it, you're free to leave." I mean, they did revolt over tax issues and everything . . .
 
haymarket said:
For many it should be the point.
Click to expand...

You are not the arbiter of these things. We each of us get to decide for ourselves. Your opnion, while noted, is meaningless to my self-determination.
 
Harshaw said:
You are not the arbiter of these things. We each of us get to decide for ourselves. Your opnion, while noted, is meaningless to my self-determination.
Click to expand...

as are the opinions of you and everyone else here and on every message board in the land .... but I thought you knew that.
 
haymarket said:
as are the opinions of you and everyone else here and on every message board in the land .... but I thought you knew that.
Click to expand...

You set yourself up as the determinant of what people should think. I don't do that.

What "should be the point" is up to the individual. They don't exist to service you. If you can convince them, then so be it, but if not, too bad.
 
haymarket said:
I guess its just me then....... and the others who have told you the same damn thing. Lots of folks have told you this but you are blind to it.

We happen to live in a nation which is a democratic republic. Anytime you feel the great unwashed threaten your caviar stash with their vote and their demands on your money you know that there are no walls keeping you here and other nations may welcome you.
Click to expand...

well I am glad you spew that bit about "caviar"

it sort of clashes with your denials here

haymarket said:
And how many times have you levied this same baseless allegation at either myself or others who advocate a progressive income tax policy only to be told

1- we do not envy you but are very happy with who we are
2- people like us already are paying for our government services thank you, and many of us are indeed successful and pay for more than what we get in return but we are accepting of that as a price we pay for a civilized and progressive society
3- the rich do have wealth that can be taxed in a far more progressive manner than the current rates

Of course, you will ignore this reply as you do with the many that have gone before it instead pretending to wallow in the self imposed delusion that we are all ragamuffin street urchins who dream each night about getting in to the Turtle McMansion and doing swan dives off the diamond encrusted high board into the Olympic sized swimming pool filled with $100 bills.

That feeds into you own self image and you do rather enjoy it.
Click to expand...
 
Harshaw said:
You set yourself up as the determinant of what people should think. I don't do that.

What "should be the point" is up to the individual. They don't exist to service you. If you can convince them, then so be it, but if not, too bad.
Click to expand...

He thinks that people who become wealthy owe much of that to people like him.
 
TurtleDude said:
He thinks that people who become wealthy owe much of that to people like him.
Click to expand...

He also thinks that the thing we should be thankful for living in the US is government services, and that "freedom" is a meaningless bumper-sticker slogan.
 
TurtleDude said:
well I am glad you spew that bit about "caviar"

it sort of clashes with your denials here
Click to expand...

I would guess that you had a point somewhere in your head that you wanted to make with these comments. i have no doubt that it made some kind of sense to you, somehow, someway at least a little bit. Sadly, it did not come across on the screen.

Are you so oblivious that you do not even recognize when someone is using sarcasm to poke fun at the very pompous image you have crafted for yourself on this message board?
 
Last edited:
Harshaw said:
He also thinks that the thing we should be thankful for living in the US is government services, and that "freedom" is a meaningless bumper-sticker slogan.
Click to expand...

The sad truth is that words like FREEDOM and LIBERTY have indeed become bumper sticker cliches used by people just like the both of you and many others here to attempt to advance a radical agenda that would destroy much of our nation and its people. That is sad and pathetic. And it comes from an intellectually dishonest ruse adopted by the right wing to attempt to pretend they are all virgins and the rest of us are whores. It is self serving and terribly fraudulent in the extreme.

Lets be honest here. All this talk of liberty and society and government is a discussion about the margins. No more and no less. Nobody is advocating for total personal liberty without any societal or governmental power or authority. Nobody is advocating for total governmental control with no personal liberty. To pretend otherwise is to try to fool both yourself and everyone else. Its about the margins.
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
The sad truth is that words like FREEDOM and LIBERTY have indeed become bumper sticker cliches used by people just like the both of you and many others here to attempt to advance a radical agenda that would destroy much of our nation and its people. That is sad and pathetic. And it comes from an intellectually dishonest ruse adopted by the right wing to attempt to pretend they are all virgins and the rest of us are whores. It is self serving and terribly fraudulent in the extreme.

Lets be honest here. All this talk of liberty and society and government is a discussion about the margins. No more and no less. Nobody is advocating for total personal liberty without any societal or governmental power or authority. Nobody is advocating for total governmental control with no personal liberty. to pretend otherwise is to try to fool both yourself and everyone else. Its about the margins.
Click to expand...

if something was part of this country's foundations its difficult for someone to prove it is radical.
 
haymarket said:
I would guess that you had a point somewhere in your head that you wanted to make with these comments. i have no doubt that it made some kind of sense to you, somehow, someway at least a little bit. Sadly, it did not come across on the screen.

Are you so oblivious that you do not even recognize when someone is using sarcasm to poke fun at the very pompous image you have crafted for yourself on this message board?
Click to expand...

when I see that crap I see someone oozing envy
 
TurtleDude said:
if something was part of this country's foundations its difficult for someone to prove it is radical.
Click to expand...

What the hell does that even mean? The founding of this country was two and a quarter centuries ago when the world was a very different place and that nation no longer exists as it did. To attempt to roll back the clock when it says 2010 to one that says 1776 or 1787 would indeed be one of the most radical moves ever attempted in this country.
 
TurtleDude said:
when I see that crap I see someone oozing envy
Click to expand...

Actually what is oozing is your own rather limited communication skills failing to make a coherent point.
 
haymarket said:
What the hell does that even mean? The founding of this country was two and a quarter centuries ago when the world was a very different place and that nation no longer exists as it did. To attempt to roll back the clock when it says 2010 to one that says 1776 or 1787 would indeed be one of the most radical moves ever attempted in this country.
Click to expand...

I saw someone once say:

"Its a good thing that the people who created this nation were not so fixated and risk adverse [sic]."

Why does a threat to the status quo irk you so much?
 
Harshaw said:
I saw someone once say:

"Its a good thing that the people who created this nation were not so fixated and risk adverse [sic]."

Why does a threat to the status quo irk you so much?
Click to expand...

in jurisprudence we call it the leftward ratchet.

here is how it works. a leftwing court comes along and rejects stare decisis and abandons precedent. The New Deal Justices for example. Then the court takes a rightward turn and since they respect precedent they affirm the rules that the left makes-the ratchet has moved leftward. Then the next leftwing court comes along and they turn the wheel farther to the left. Do you know why Bork really scared the left? He said bad precedent deserves no respect and some of the left's most cherished cases-such as Roe v Wade (I am pro choice btw but Roe v wade was a judicial abortion) were incredibly bad opinions.

people like Haymarket call it PROGRESS when we get saddled with crap like a progressive income tax or affirmative action-two things that completely went against years of tradition, but the minute that excrement is the status quo, he squeals like Ned Beatty in Deliverance about getting rid of it.
 
actually turtle, to correct you yet another time - the Progressive Income Tax was a result of an Amendment to the US Constitution - the 16th to be specific. It did not come from the courts - be they left or right so your mention of it in your screed against court decisions is badly out of place. And remember, it was Republicans who championed it.

your example of an ideological radical SC doing away with precedent and going their own way is a perfect illustration of the Citizens United decision.

and turtle, it sounds like that Ned Beatty part really stuck with you over the years. You really do give us far too much personal information.
 
Last edited:
Oh, of course. The ratchet effect is well-known. And it has a specific Supreme Court imprimatur when it comes to those individual liberties haymarket thinks are archaic and of a world long past.
 
haymarket said:
actually turtle, to correct you yet another time - the Progressive Income Tax was a result of an Amendment to the US Constitution - the 16th to be specific. It did not come from the courts - be they left or right so your mention of it in your screed against court decisions is badly out of place. And remember, it was Republicans who championed it.

your example of an ideological radical SC doing away with precedent and going their own way is a perfect illustration of the Citizens United decision.

and turtle, it sounds like that Ned Beatty part really stuck with you over the years. You really do give us far too much personal information.
Click to expand...

gee if I were talking about the income tax specificaly you might have a point. since I was not-you do not (again)
 
Harshaw said:
Oh, of course. The ratchet effect is well-known. And it has a specific Supreme Court imprimatur when it comes to those individual liberties haymarket thinks are archaic and of a world long past.
Click to expand...

You do love the strawman. Without one you would be lost completely and utterly.
 
haymarket said:
actually turtle, to correct you yet another time - the Progressive Income Tax was a result of an Amendment to the US Constitution - the 16th to be specific.
Click to expand...

Oh? Where does the 16th Amendment mention anything about progressive taxation? This oughta be good.

Perhaps it was discussed in those "hundreds" of Supreme Court cases heard before Marbury v. Madison. :lamo
 
haymarket said:
actually turtle, to correct you yet another time - the Progressive Income Tax was a result of an Amendment to the US Constitution - the 16th to be specific. It did not come from the courts - be they left or right so your mention of it in your screed against court decisions is badly out of place. And remember, it was Republicans who championed it.

your example of an ideological radical SC doing away with precedent and going their own way is a perfect illustration of the Citizens United decision.

and turtle, it sounds like that Ned Beatty part really stuck with you over the years. You really do give us far too much personal information.
Click to expand...

since you want to argue constitutional law with me, what caused the supreme court to reject the precedent of Schechter Poultry?
 
Harshaw said:
Oh? Where does the 16th Amendment mention anything about progressive taxation? This oughta be good.

Perhaps it was discussed in those "hundreds" of Supreme Court cases heard before Marbury v. Madison. :lamo
Click to expand...

ouch that's gonna leave a big mark
 
TurtleDude said:
gee if I were talking about the income tax specificaly you might have a point. since I was not-you do not (again)
Click to expand...

No - you tried to squeeze in your personal cause celebre - the progressive income tax - in your rant about SC decisions and precedent. You were talking about the roof leaking but then decided to scream about the basement at the same time because its part of the house. Its almost a pathological obsession with you that you cannot even control or moderate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom