• 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!

Brutal attack on Republican fundraiser appears politically motivated

misterman said:
I thought you were smarter and had more integrity than to throw a bunch of apologist, revisionist Southern bull**** at me, combined with simply redefining "liberal" and "conservative" to suit your narrow purposes.

It's funny too that you mention Jim Crow, which kept blacks from competing with whites for jobs, and then claim the minimum wage was needed to protect whites from black competition.

Pretty sad.
Click to expand...
I'm obviously smart enough to remember the true history of the Democrat party. Earth to MM, my whole family were Democrats and hated the party because it wasn't conservative enough, some switched to Republican but others stayed with the D because they didn't want to be thought of as voting for the "rich people's party", heaven forbid they learn the history of the economic enrichments of the past.
 
Apparently he doesn't have to throw anything better at you since you can't handle what you've already got. All you did was complain about the tactic - you didn't defend your position or refute with facts anything said. So there's really no need for smarter, is there. :lol:
 
misterman said:
I thought you were smarter and had more integrity than to throw a bunch of apologist, revisionist Southern bull**** at me, combined with simply redefining "liberal" and "conservative" to suit your narrow purposes.

It's funny too that you mention Jim Crow, which kept blacks from competing with whites for jobs, and then claim the minimum wage was needed to protect whites from black competition.

Pretty sad.
Click to expand...

The minimum wage was pushed by dem union bosses in the north to prevent blacks migrating towards northern industry from undercutting the white unions. Jim Crow was more about political rights. But the fact remains, many "laws" that you lefties cherish have racist roots, such as the Davis-Bacon Prevailing wage laws and the post Civil War gun control laws-first aimed at Blacks (in the south) and "Papist" immigrants in the North
 
ANOTHER_ANGRY_AMERICAN said:
No where near as owned as the ASSCLOWN obama who is nothing short of a puppet for the health care industry and George Soros
Click to expand...

Yes, yes, ... hate Obama in defense of a sellout-publican.... because that makes sooooooooo much sense.
 
TurtleDude said:
The minimum wage was pushed by dem union bosses in the north to prevent blacks migrating towards northern industry from undercutting the white unions. Jim Crow was more about political rights. But the fact remains, many "laws" that you lefties cherish have racist roots, such as the Davis-Bacon Prevailing wage laws and the post Civil War gun control laws-first aimed at Blacks (in the south) and "Papist" immigrants in the North
Click to expand...

The operative word in that sentence is "WAS" ... now it's used to keep dishonest business scum from raping the public.
 
LaMidRighter said:
I'm obviously smart enough to remember the true history of the Democrat party. Earth to MM, my whole family were Democrats and hated the party because it wasn't conservative enough, some switched to Republican but others stayed with the D because they didn't want to be thought of as voting for the "rich people's party", heaven forbid they learn the history of the economic enrichments of the past.
Click to expand...

Sure ....

The right give themselves tax breaks at the expense of the middle class. The right tends to suck off business and business owners. The right favors corporate welfare while completely belittling social welfare programs for people.

Then the right acts suprised that nobody likes them or their ridiculous anti-people policies.
 
Vader said:
The operative word in that sentence is "WAS" ... now it's used to keep dishonest business scum from raping the public.
Click to expand...
Horse****, it's used as a vote leveraging agent like anything else. The MW is demonstrably worthless as it never keeps up with inflation and constantly leads to cost increases. By it's very nature it invalidates itself.
 
Vader said:
Sure ....

The right give themselves tax breaks at the expense of the middle class. The right tends to suck off business and business owners. The right favors corporate welfare while completely belittling social welfare programs for people.

Then the right acts suprised that nobody likes them or their ridiculous anti-people policies.
Click to expand...
Actually, the most loopholes in the taxcode were written by Democrats.
 
LaMidRighter said:
Do you really believe that load of horse****? Really? I think I would know my state a little better than you do, Democrats in Louisiana have always stood for social programs, Huey P. Long was famous for giving away **** at the expense of taxpayers.
Click to expand...

:roll: - Pick up a history book why don't you?

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Democrats]Southern Democrats - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

In the early 1800s, they were the definitive pro-slavery wing of the party, opposed to both the anti-slavery Republicans (GOP) and the more liberal Northern Democrats. After losing control of their party and territory in the American Civil War, and during the Republican-led Reconstruction that followed, Southern Democrats regrouped into various vigilante organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan and the White League.

Eventually "Redemption" was finalized in the Compromise of 1877 and the Redeemers gained control throughout the South. As the New Deal began to liberalize Democrats as a whole, Southern Democrats largely stayed as conservative as they had always been, with some even breaking off to form farther right-wing splinters like the Dixiecrats. After the Civil Rights Movement successfully challenged the Jim Crow laws and other forms of institutionalized racism, and after the Democrats as a whole came to symbolize the mainstream left of the United States, the form, if not the content, of Southern Democratic politics began to change. At that point, most Southern Democrats defected to the Republican Party, and helped accelerate the latter's transformation into a more conservative organization
Click to expand...

When Richard Nixon courted voters with his Southern Strategy, many Democrats became Republicans and the South became fertile ground for the GOP, which conversely was becoming more conservative as the Democrats were becoming more liberal. However, Democratic incumbents still held sway over voters in many states, especially those of the Deep South. In fact, until the 1980s, Democrats still had much control over Southern politics. It wasn't until the 1990s that Democratic control collapsed, starting with the elections of 1994, in which Republicans gained control of both houses of Congress, through the rest of the decade. Southern Democrats of today who vote the Democratic ticket are mostly urban liberals. Rural residents tend to vote the Republican ticket, although there are a sizable number of conservative Democrats.
Click to expand...

Modern day Southern Republicans are former Democrats in red clothes.
 
LaMidRighter said:
I'm obviously smart enough to remember the true history of the Democrat party. Earth to MM, my whole family were Democrats and hated the party because it wasn't conservative enough, some switched to Republican but others stayed with the D because they didn't want to be thought of as voting for the "rich people's party", heaven forbid they learn the history of the economic enrichments of the past.
Click to expand...

So why was your whole family Democrats in the first place?

If they thought the party wasn't conservative enough, why didn't they become Republicans years earlier? What made them all change their minds? And when did they do it - some time after the mid-1960s, perhaps?
 
Last edited:
LaMidRighter said:
Actually, the most loopholes in the taxcode were written by Democrats.
Click to expand...

This is another completely absurd statement. Both parties have written plenty of "loopholes" in the tax code.
 
misterman said:
This is another completely absurd statement. Both parties have written plenty of "loopholes" in the tax code.
Click to expand...
No it's not. The sixteenth amendment which created the original income tax was written by Democrats, they were the one's who created the IRS, as well the capital gains rules were written by Democrats and so was the Alternative Minimum Tax which is punitive towards the middle class and small businesses.
 
misterman said:
In the NORTH. We were talking about Southern Democrats.
Click to expand...
Where do you think the party started? Yeah thought so. A Democrat is a Democrat, only the accent changes.
 
LaMidRighter said:
No it's not. The sixteenth amendment which created the original income tax was written by Democrats, they were the one's who created the IRS
Click to expand...

Creating the income tax doesn't constitute creating a loophole in the income tax!

as well the capital gains rules were written by Democrats and so was the Alternative Minimum Tax which is punitive towards the middle class and small businesses.
Click to expand...

Capital gains, huh? In general, Democrats want to tax them like regular income, Republicans want a LOOPHOLE for them.

The AMT CLOSES loopholes. Duh.
 
LaMidRighter said:
No it's not. The sixteenth amendment which created the original income tax was written by Democrats, they were the one's who created the IRS, as well the capital gains rules were written by Democrats and so was the Alternative Minimum Tax which is punitive towards the middle class and small businesses.
Click to expand...

Yet in those years that the GOP had the majority in congress and a Republican president, they didn't try to repeal any of what the DEMS had done....
 
LaMidRighter said:
Where do you think the party started? Yeah thought so. A Democrat is a Democrat, only the accent changes.
Click to expand...

See, this shows just how profoundly ignorant you are about this issue. Please, please go educate yourself about history.

The Democratic party was formally split into two parties just before the Civil War. They actually ran two different candidates for President in 1860. Their differences persisted right up until the 1960s and 1970s, when civil rights finally drove Southern conservatives to the GOP. Until then, there was essentially only one party in the South. Are you saying most people in the South between 1865 and 1965 was a liberal because most were Democrats?

Political parties in the U.S. are very broad. There are (still) conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans, and there were alot more of each until the 1960s.

I've already provided a link about southern Democrats. Read it and stop embarassing yourself.
 
misterman said:
Creating the income tax doesn't constitute creating a loophole in the income tax!
Click to expand...
Except for the fact that they wrote them in. So you only read between the lines when you need to restructure your arguments don't you? That's a pretty dishonest tactic.



Capital gains, huh? In general, Democrats want to tax them like regular income, Republicans want a LOOPHOLE for them.
Click to expand...
That is a foolish statement, why don't you do some historical analysis and get back to me on that. BTW, you do know that the IRS and CPA lobbies are some of the largest political contributors in the U.S. right? And they back both parties heavily as a hedge.

The AMT CLOSES loopholes. Duh.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't, it replaces the income tax for people who own property but do not draw an income directly from earnings, it subjects small businesses assets to taxable value if the the owner pays himself directly from profits. You really don't have a clue about economics, tax, and finance do you?

UtahBill said:
Yet in those years that the GOP had the majority in congress and a Republican president, they didn't try to repeal any of what the DEMS had done....
Click to expand...
You are correct about that with a few minor exceptions and I don't have a defense for it. Then again I am more of a constitutionalist than a Republican.
 
misterman said:
See, this shows just how profoundly ignorant you are about this issue. Please, please go educate yourself about history.

The Democratic party was formally split into two parties just before the Civil War. They actually ran two different candidates for President in 1860. Their differences persisted right up until the 1960s and 1970s, when civil rights finally drove Southern conservatives to the GOP. Until then, there was essentially only one party in the South. Are you saying most people in the South between 1865 and 1965 was a liberal because most were Democrats?

Political parties in the U.S. are very broad. There are (still) conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans, and there were alot more of each until the 1960s.

I've already provided a link about southern Democrats. Read it and stop embarassing yourself.
Click to expand...
What a crock.
 
UtahBill said:
Can't agree with you.....I grew up in the south and saw some of what is said about the southern DEMS becoming more like the GOP.
Click to expand...
"Some" is not the complete reality. The fact is that a conservative Democrat is still going to redistribute, game the system, and get creative with people's taxes, then take credit for the projects they fund. Misterman is wrong.
 
misterman said:
Political parties in the U.S. are very broad. There are (still) conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans, and there were alot more of each until the 1960s.
.
Click to expand...
Left leaning GOP and right leaning DEM are about he same as moderates, and if they ever joined forces could elect a president. This would be done while the left, and right, extremists are pushing their own agendas.
 
LaMidRighter said:
Except for the fact that they wrote them in. So you only read between the lines when you need to restructure your arguments don't you? That's a pretty dishonest tactic.
Click to expand...

Excuse me, but the claim was that there were loopholes. My comments stand.

That is a foolish statement, why don't you do some historical analysis and get back to me on that. BTW, you do know that the IRS and CPA lobbies are some of the largest political contributors in the U.S. right? And they back both parties heavily as a hedge.
Click to expand...

No, you do the analysis if you think there's some to be done.

No it doesn't, it replaces the income tax for people who own property but do not draw an income directly from earnings, it subjects small businesses assets to taxable value if the the owner pays himself directly from profits. You really don't have a clue about economics, tax, and finance do you?
Click to expand...

It does all that too. I never said it was a good solution. It sure as hell isn't a "loophole" though. It was designed to close loopholes though.

You are correct about that with a few minor exceptions and I don't have a defense for it. Then again I am more of a constitutionalist than a Republican.
Click to expand...

You don't need a defense for it. Just don't go around claiming that one party is guilty of something.
 
UtahBill said:
Left leaning GOP and right leaning DEM are about he same as moderates, and if they ever joined forces could elect a president. This would be done while the left, and right, extremists are pushing their own agendas.
Click to expand...

Possibly - but if it's a third candidate, it risks simply taking votes from one side and not the other, electing one of the other two. Ross Perot essentially did this.
 
misterman said:
Excuse me, but the claim was that there were loopholes. My comments stand.
Click to expand...
I said the Democrats caused them, stop misrepresenting my statements or I will report you. I'm getting tired of these little games of yours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom