Author Topic: Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.  (Read 1018 times)

Offline Maverick

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13919
Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.
« Reply #15 on: October 21, 2000, 11:08:00 PM »
Here's a thought. The best friend clinton had in the election was Perot. Perot handed clinton the election by splitting the "conservative" vote.

If you do not vote, you have no right to complain about the outcome.

If you vote unintelligently you can't complain either as you did not perform your duty to be an informed electorate.

The time for "ideals" or "making a statement" is in the early days and particularly in the primary elections. There your vote tells the major candidates what it is that is important to you.

You want to "make a statement"? Start writing letters to the candidate of your choice and explain your views and desires. Don't wait for a pollster with a limited population base and loaded questions decide policy for the country.

Mav

[This message has been edited by Maverick (edited 10-22-2000).]
DEFINITION OF A VETERAN
A Veteran - whether active duty, retired, national guard or reserve - is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a check made payable to "The United States of America", for an amount of "up to and including my life."
Author Unknown

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.
« Reply #16 on: October 22, 2000, 09:44:00 PM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by Snoopi:
-the country is in debt
-the money is your money,spent by the
 government according to your wishes, in  theory
-hence it is the citizens that are in debt
-hence they owe you nothing

Only problem here is that IF there is a surplus to actually DO something with, Neither one of these politicians is going to apply it all to the debt.

So the question is more like "Since we are NOT going to pay off the debt, should we return some of the overtaxation to those that paid the taxes or should we just transfer some wealth to those who did not pay taxes or paid very little?"

Fine by me if they put ALL the surplus against the debt.

Fine by me if they give me some back, since I paid in a wad.

Not fine by me if they want to just give my share to someone else WITHOUT MY DIRECT INPUT ON WHO GETS WHAT.  

In 1997, the top 10 percent of earners made 42.8 percent of all income in 1997 but paid 63.2 percent of all federal individual income taxes.

The bottom 50 percent of the nation's taxpayers earned only 13.8 percent of all income in 1997, but they paid an even smaller fraction of the federal individual income taxes collected--4.3 percent."

Now just who SHOULD get money back on taxes if they are NOT going to apply it to the Debt?

   
 

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Snoopi

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 56
Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.
« Reply #17 on: October 23, 2000, 01:45:00 AM »
OK...Personally I say give the cash back if not used on the debt.

But politicans don't do what the people want.
They do what the power brokers and lobbyists that really get them elected, want.

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.
« Reply #18 on: October 23, 2000, 10:27:00 AM »
...another conservative is born.

 

It's just about common sense, really.

People know what's right and fair.

 
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Snoopi

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 56
Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.
« Reply #19 on: October 23, 2000, 01:18:00 PM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by Toad:
...another conservative is born.

   

It's just about common sense, really.

People know what's right and fair.

   

1) I hate to consider myself a conservative or a liberal of whatever. I don't fit into either category.

It depends on the issues at hand.
Unfortunately the pendulum seems to swing one way or the other in political thinking.

2) Common sense is NOT common I'm afraid.
If it was we would be better off.

Common sense example:
If you buy with a credit card and don't pay it off before the end of the month you pay MORE money for the object you bought.
And people usually think "I can't afford it right now so i'll put it on my credit card".
What happened to waiting a while and then buy it for cash? (or using the card and never carrying a balance).
This very common.
These people actually run or work in the government !

A lot of people can barely run the basics in their life, nevermind "Know what's right and fair".
"Right and fair", means when I spill coffee on myself I am the idiot. Not the company who sold me the coffee. It is my fault if I slip and fall.....I should be paying more attention. Many people, only do what will benefit them and find a way to justify it.
That is the prime problem with society today.

Regards,
Snoopi

BTW God help you guys though... I see both candidates as lacking the vision needed today. (Both are strong in some areas though)
We have had the same problem here in Canada since the moron named Brian Mulroney.
He was bending over for his corporate buddies instead of doing what was best for the country he was born in.
i.e.  NAFTA sucks.
It puts too much power in the hands of the companies and takes it from "the man on the street".

Guess what? Mulroney was a lawyer...
Most of the politicians here are.
It seems to be the standard career move. :P


[This message has been edited by Snoopi (edited 10-23-2000).]

Offline Snoopi

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 56
Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.
« Reply #20 on: October 23, 2000, 01:20:00 PM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by Toad:
...another conservative is born.

 

It's just about common sense, really.

People know what's right and fair.

 

1) I hate to consider myself a conservative or a liberal of whatever. I don't fit into either category.

It depends on the issues at hand.
Unfortunately the pendulum seems to swing one way or the other in political thinking.

2) Common sense is NOT common I'm afraid.
If it was we would be better off.

Common sense example:
If you buy with a credit card and don't pay it off before the end of the month you pay MORE money for the object you bought.
And people usually think "I can't afford it right now so i'll put it on my credit card".
What happened to waiting a while and then buy it for cash. (or using the card and never carrying a balance).
This very common.
These people actually run or work in the government.

A lot of people can barely run the basics in their life, nevermind "Know what's right and fair".
"Right and fair", means when I spill coffee on myself I am the idiot. Not the company who sold me the coffee. It is my fault if I slip and fall.....I should be paying more attention. Many people, only do what will benefit them and find a way to justify it.
That is the prime problem with society today.

Regards,
Snoopi

BTW God help you guys though... I see both candidates as lacking the vision needed today. (Both are strong in some areas though)
We have had the same problem here in Canada since the moron named Brian Mulroney.
He was bending over for his corporate buddies instead of doing what was best for the country he was born in.
i.e.  NAFTA sucks.
It puts too much power in the hands of the companies and takes it from "the man on the street".

Guess what? Mulroney was a lawyer...
Most of the politicians here are.
It seems to be the standard career move. :P

Offline blur

  • Parolee
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 154
Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.
« Reply #21 on: October 23, 2000, 01:39:00 PM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by cabby:
Quote:

"Republicans want to give it away with tax cuts. "

What do you mean "give it away"?????  Fer cryin' out loud, it's the people's freakin'money not the damn Government's!!!

The Government confiscates my income thru over-taxation, and i have to fight these bureaucrat idiots to get my own money back from 'em??  WTF????  

Didn't we fight a Revolutionary War over this kind of crap??  Taking one person's money out of their pocket and giving it to another person is morally questionable, and destructive to personal initiative.

So many American's just "bend-over" and take it from the Government these days i wonder what the hell is wrong with them.  I'm OK with an Income Tax(grudgingly) but damn!!  it  can't be confiscatory or why the hell bother!!!

Sheesh,

Cabby

Preach on!
Government in this country has become an over-bloated leech.
Democrat or Republican, it makes no difference as both parties are committed to MORE government programs.

I have the party for you… http://www.HarryBrowne.org/
Jump on board and come on in for the big win!

Offline Udie

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3395
Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.
« Reply #22 on: October 23, 2000, 02:18:00 PM »
Blur,

 Here's the way I'm looking at it, with a bit of my political history.  In '92 I was in college it was the first election I was going to vote in. So I started paying attention to the media.  I loved Bush after the gulf war, but I was unedjucated and unemployed so I though he was doing a crappy job here at home.  At first I liked Clinton, until I saw him on the Mtv interview, it felt like I was watching a softball game. I could tell right then and there that he was plastic and didn't like him after that.  So I went to Perot, a person my father had admired since the early 70's.  Clinton wins and he and the democrats over the next 2 years try and take over 1/7 of the US economy, plus raise taxes.   So I knew that I wasn't a democrat then, but still didn't know about the republicans.

 In 94 we had the contract w/ America and the republicans took over the house and senate after 30+ years of Democrat control. I watched, read and listened to the news everyday, realy everyday since 94  , and they did everything they said they were going to do in the contract, and even passed most of what was in the contract, they hadn't promised to pass a single thing only debate them.  Then in 95 they got school lunched and turned into a bunch of sniveling wimps too scared to do anything.  They go after clinton on the monica thing when there were MUCH BIGGER CRIMES committed by his administration.  My faith in the (national) republican has gone downhill ever since.

 SO   This election represents my "last" chance for the republicans. If/when G.W. wins, the ball is in his court.  It's up to him and congress, provided the republicans keep control, to keep my faith in the party.  If they get control of the executive and legislative branches and STILL can't get anything done they will lose my support and I'll be looking for a "3rd" party.  My problem is this, the republican platform still represents my views by about 75%  no other party comes close, where am I to go?  Seems a bit like taxation with out representation to me...

 I do see what your saying though. Both parties like government, just diferent styles of government.  I think it's a result of the 30's and Rosevelt.  He put in all that government social security crap federalized just about anything he could, then when ww2 broke out and saved the US economy HE and government get the credit. Hense people think the government is the solution to all their ills.

 I wonder how many people in our congress actualy know what their constitutional duty realy is.  My former representative, Shealy Jackson Lee (d), THANK GOD I MOVED, is a perfect example.  Back when nasa landed the pathfinder on Mars I saw her asked the dumbest most stupid question I've ever heard, on CNN too.  She was at NASA and talking with the scientist while they were looking at pictures coming in from pathfinder.  She asked them if they could take it over to where the astronauts had left the flag back in 1969.  The scientist politly told here that they had left the flag on the moon not Mars.


 Well I guess I'm starting to ramble again   so i'd better stop before I piss somebody off hehe. However, I do think that we'd be a whole lot better off if our congress didn't have so many idiots who have obviously never even read the constitution. Sad realy...


udie

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18206
Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.
« Reply #23 on: October 23, 2000, 02:45:00 PM »
Lesser of two evil boys, the lesser of two evils... that's all you can expect. Neither one's a saint or else they wouldn't be in politics. Gore has the gift of gab, able to sway the less informed, just like the scummy used car dealer down on the corner. Bush is for big business not big government but he won't nor is he able to cut government as much as I'd like to see. I don't expect jack back with this so called "surplus" because as this post said, there isn't one. It's all hypothetical numbers drawn from years into the future. Heck, if there was a pile of money laying around, they'd just vote themselves another pay raise   I just don't want to see anymore government backed programs doling out my money. To all those who are going to vote for a candidate other than Gore or Bush, I say go ahead. It's just another vote taken away from Gore.
Bush has my vote on this one, I think we as a country and world leader will be better off with George than Al behind the wheel.
Just wish it was over, tired of all the political crap gumming up the tv and the bbs  

Eagler
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

LJK Raubvogel

  • Guest
Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.
« Reply #24 on: October 23, 2000, 05:06:00 PM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by Eagler:
Gore has the gift of gab, able to sway the less informed, just like the scummy used car dealer down on the corner.
Eagler

You took the words right out of my mouth. His wife is a real treat too.


------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps

Offline Snoopi

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 56
Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.
« Reply #25 on: October 24, 2000, 05:38:00 PM »
Everyone talks about Gore vs Bush...

Since when does the President actually run the country ?

It's the whole team not just the figurehead.
Yeah technically he does... but in reality ???

Offline StSanta

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2496
Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.
« Reply #26 on: October 25, 2000, 05:15:00 AM »
In reality the New World Order runs things.

And, we all know who're part of the New World Order on this list, don't we?

So, treat me nicely.


------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
 

[This message has been edited by StSanta (edited 10-25-2000).]

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18206
Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.
« Reply #27 on: October 25, 2000, 07:49:00 AM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by StSanta:
In reality the New World Order runs things.

And, we all know who're part of the New World Order on this list, don't we?

So, treat me nicely.


Speaking of the new world order.. I used to think it was a joke for the paranoid. I'm not so sure any more. Seems some have the idea that equal power across the globe is a good thing. To me, that time has not come yet as we, consciousness as a whole, globally, are not enlightened enough yet.

Why is such news so devastating to the worlds security as the below story not making it to the talking heads on CNN, MSNBC, etc.. Answer: Because they are in bed with the libs and want to be the voice for them should that day of big brother ever be realized.................spoo n feeding us our daily thoughts and actions. Does that sound too paranoid??


Gore Faces Probe Over Russia Arms Deal
Wednesday, October 25, 2000 By Barry Schweid    
WASHINGTON — Backed by a statement of concern from four former Republican secretaries of state and other officials, Senate Republicans are airing allegations that Vice President Al Gore in 1995 secretly acquiesced to Russian arms sales to Iran.

Coming just two weeks before the Nov. 7 election, the Gore presidential campaign labeled the issue political and said a Senate hearing Wednesday would only rehash actions that were well known five years ago and done in the interest of U.S. security.HUH???

But Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., co-chair of the hearing with Sen. Gordon H. Smith, R-Ore., said, "U.S. national security is at stake."

Two of the 11 officials signing the statement of concern served in Democratic administrations.

Brownback, in a statement, said Secretary of State Madeleine Albright had admitted in a secret letter to Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov that Gore promised Russia the United States would not enforce a 1992 law designed to curb the spread of dangerous technology. Gore had been a co-sponsor of the law when he was in the Senate.

"The administration must come clean and share with Congress the content of those secret agreements," Brownback said.

On Tuesday, 11 former high-level officials issued a statement saying Gore and then-Russian Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin agreed in 1995 that the United States would acquiesce to the sale by Russia to Iran of "highly threatening military equipment such as modern submarines, fighter planes and wake-homing torpedoes." The statement said Gore did not inform Congress fully about the deal.

"We are deeply disturbed by the agreement," the officials said.

"The president's most important job is safeguarding our nation's security and our ability to protect our interests, our citizens, our allies and friends," the statement said.

Gore spokesman Jim Kennedy said the agreement with Russia prevented new arms sales to Iran, thereby helping to safeguard U.S. security.

The agreement was publicly announced and Congress was briefed at the time, Kennedy said in a statement. "No member of Congress and none of these former officials complained about it then or in the years since," he said.

"Their inaccurate complaints about it, only now, 14 days before the election, speaks for itself," Kennedy said.

The four former secretaries of state who joined in the statement were George P. Shultz, Henry A. Kissinger, James A. Baker III and Lawrence Eagleburger. Four former secretaries of defense — Frank C. Carlucci, Donald H. Rumsfeld, James R. Schlesinger and Caspar W. Weinberger — along with former CIA director R. James Woolsey and former national security advisers Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft joined with them.

All worked in Republican administrations except Brzezinski and Woolsey. Brzezinski has been critical of the Clinton administration's foreign policy in the past. Schlesinger served in both Republican and Democratic administrations.

The New York Times reported earlier this month that Gore had promised the United States would not interfere with Moscow's fulfillment of existing sales contracts for conventional arms to Iran on condition such sales would conclude by the end of 1999.

The report said Washington agreed not to penalize Moscow under the 1992 law, which prohibited arms sales to countries the United States viewed as exporters of terrorism.

The Washington Times then reported that Chernomyrdin had urged Gore in a classified "Dear Al" letter on Dec. 9, 1995, to keep Russian nuclear cooperation with Iran confidential and said it was "not to be conveyed to third parties, including the U.S. Congress."


Just what I want to see, terrorists in subs with wake homing torpedoes...

Makes you wonder who side he's on.. or the sad fact Gore will do anything with anyone to gain/retain the power.

makes me sick

Eagler


"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline Snoopi

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 56
Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.
« Reply #28 on: October 25, 2000, 03:20:00 PM »
New World Order !  lol

Yeah.. run by Tinky Winky, Po, and LaLa with Barney the dinosaur as miltary head.
Psst...They start with brainwashing the kids.

Not.

Most people would rather see conspiracy in something, than admit that humans are idiots.
No organized big plan, no evil aliens.
Just selfish, coveting, ignorant humans only thinking of themselves, and not the world as a  whole.

Offline Mickey1992

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3362
Read my lips, there is no Federal surplus.
« Reply #29 on: October 25, 2000, 03:49:00 PM »
Did anyone see Jesse Ventura on ABC Wednesday morning?  He reiterated the fact that there is no surplus for the candidates to campaign with.  To paraphrase, he said that the "surplus" is like a man coming home with a $500 paycheck and telling the family that they were going out to celebrate, while there are $25,000 worth of bills sitting on the kitchen table.

But the thing that I thought was most interesting was when the interviewer asked him what he wanted to see in this election. (Paraphrasing) He said that he wanted to see an election where the popular vote went to one candidate, and the electoral college tally went to the other.  He felt that this would once and for all force the US to get rid of the electoral system.