Eventually, we will all hate Obama too

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Grand_Moff_Gav
An interesting little article this one:



What are your thoughts?

(Article found here.)

Robtard
If elected, his popularity will wan to and fro, depending on his policies and the state of the U.S./world, just like any president. But not everybody will hate him at any given time, that is nonsense.

There are still people who firmly believe GW is saving us form the "evil-doers" and he alone is keeping America standing. As the greasy fat warden said in 'Cool Hand Luke', "some people, you just can't reach."

Edit: Decent article overall though.

KidRock
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=70308

Obama to take 2,500 dollars from each American citizen to give to the U.N.

BUT HE WONT RAISE TAXES!

Robtard
Kid Rock,

"He said the legislation, if approved, dedicates 0.7 percent of the U.S. gross national product to foreign aid"

Knee-jerk reaction, I say"**** that", but how much are we currently spending on foreign aid?

I do find it funny that a staunch Bush/war supporter such as yourself is crying over potentially losing $2,500.00 over a thirteen year period (aka $192.33 per year), when you don't bother asking how much it will cost you when it comes time to pay for the $600 billion and currently rising war bill and the cost that will continue to incure after it's over.

lord xyz
Bush was a retard, that's why thinking people hate him and America. Obama is your more common American president, a big speaker and a poser, although not really got much going upstairs. I admit, I don't like him as much as I used to, but I still favoured him over most candidates, because I believe he will make America and the world a better place...for a while.

KidRock
Originally posted by Robtard
Kid Rock,

"He said the legislation, if approved, dedicates 0.7 percent of the U.S. gross national product to foreign aid"

Knee-jerk reaction, I say"**** that", but how much are we currently spending on foreign aid?

I do find it funny that a staunch Bush/war supporter such as yourself is crying over potentially losing $2,500.00 over a thirteen year period (aka $192.33 per year), when you don't bother asking how much it will cost you when it comes time to pay for the $600 billion and currently rising war bill and the cost that will continue to incure after it's over.

The point was Obama claims he will try to help out the lower classes and hides behind his shield of lowering taxes for the poor while raising taxes for the rich..yet they dont know about programs such as this that he is pushing that will take money out of the pockets of all Americans. And for what? The U.N? One of the most useless organizations ever created?

By the way I am not too concerned about the cost of the war in Iraq since it consists of 5% of our entire debt..there are more important things to worry about im sure.

chithappens
What are the programs Obama is pushing? I'm asking because you obviously have a list in front of you along with their costs.

Quiero Mota
Originally posted by lord xyz
Bush was a retard, that's why thinking people hate him and America. Obama is your more common American president, a big speaker and a poser, although not really got much going upstairs. I admit, I don't like him as much as I used to, but I still favoured him over most candidates, because I believe he will make America and the world a better place...for a while.

Anti-Americanism predates Bush, but he sure as hell didn't help the problem. I'm a fan of internationals things, and I still don't have a clue what the exact origin of Anti-Americanism is.

Why is he a poser?

Blax_Hydralisk
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Why is he a poser?

Because he doesn't hold his nuts when he talks and speaks proper English.

Obviously, he's not really black. He's a poser.

chillmeistergen
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Anti-Americanism predates Bush, but he sure as hell didn't help the problem. I'm a fan of internationals things, and I still don't have a clue what the exact origin of Anti-Americanism is.

Why is he a poser?

Probably the apparent complete ignorance to world geography, as a whole. It's the fact that 85% of Americans don't own a passport, yet their votes mean so much to world affairs, it understandably annoys people.

Grand_Moff_Gav
Americans are what they are.

Naz
Intersting article, I have no real opinion to voice.

Blax_Hydralisk
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
as a whole. It's the fact that 85% of Americans don't own a passport, yet their votes mean so much to world affairs,

Is that true though?

Everyone knows that "the popular vote" really doesn't mean shit when it comes to elections. The people who's votes actually decide who becomes President and whether or not we go to war, etc. makes up a pretty small percentage of the Countries population. Our (Common people) biggest contribution really seems to be public donations and such.

And off-topic.... what is the actual point of having super delegates?

Devil King
Maybe GW IS just like Batman.

Quiero Mota
Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
Because he doesn't hold his nuts when he talks

He can't because Jesse Jackson cut them off.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Probably the apparent complete ignorance to world geography, as a whole. It's the fact that 85% of Americans don't own a passport, yet their votes mean so much to world affairs, it understandably annoys people.

So if every American buys a passport tomorrow, peope around the world will stop burning our flags? I don't think so.

It's gotta go further back, and be something a little more important than whether every American can find Lithuania on a map.

Blax_Hydralisk
It's not that hard to understand imo. Our foreign policy sucks. We have a habit of constantly sticking our noses into everyone and everything business for our own gains, under the guise of "We're doing it for freedom", and we've been that way throughout our entire history as a nation. I think it's hilarious that we spend hundreds of years poking around in other peoples countries and stuff, then WWII comes around and "freedom" as we know it is threatened and suddenly we're neutral. laughing out loud

Quiero Mota
Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
It's not that hard to understand imo. Our foreign policy sucks. We have a habit of constantly sticking our noses into everyone and everything business for our own gains, under the guise of "We're doing it for freedom", and we've been that way throughout our entire history as a nation. I think it's hilarious that we spend hundreds of years poking around in other peoples countries and stuff, then WWII comes around and "freedom" as we know it is threatened and suddenly we're neutral. laughing out loud

French citizens were waving American flags as our tanks were rolling through their towns. 60 years later they don't like us: what happened?

chillmeistergen
You were a convenience, live with it.

You were also fighting in a war way into it's later stages, with an enormous death count. Then, for some strange reason, you expected France to fight Iraq and Afghanistan with you, for no real reason apart form the formidable 'axis of evil'. I wish the UK had reacted the same way as France did, but as a country, we're a sucker for power.

Blax_Hydralisk
Originally posted by chillmeistergen


You were also fighting in a war way into it's later stages, with an enormous death count.

Right on. We didn't get involved in the War until it was specifically within our interests to do so. "**** our allies for 2 years. Our harbor gets attacked? It's on now!"

I can see why other countries hate us so much... but again the hatred should be aimed at our Governmen and it's shitty foreign policy, not the citzens themselves. As I said earlier we really don't play as big a role in the elections of our own leaders as everyone pretends we do.

Quiero Mota
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
You were a convenience, live with it.

You were also fighting in a war way into it's later stages, with an enormous death count. Then, for some strange reason, you expected France to fight Iraq and Afghanistan with you, for no real reason apart form the formidable 'axis of evil'. I wish the UK had reacted the same way as France did, but as a country, we're a sucker for power.

No one expects France to fight. I wish the UK would've too, instead of helping in a war that never should've happened.

But Anti-Americanism was around long before the 2003 invasion.

Blax_Hydralisk
And so was our Imperialistic views on how to deal with other Countries. no expression

Quiero Mota
Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
And so was our Imperialistic views on how to deal with other Countries. no expression

Like you said, that's a good reason to hate the American govt. But redirecting that to a working man because he doesn't own a passport?

chillmeistergen
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
No one expects France to fight. I wish the UK would've too, instead of helping in a war that never should've happened.

But Anti-Americanism was around long before the 2003 invasion.

It was less widespread, but it was still around, you're right. I don't know why that is, but it may well be because of the amount of stereotyping Americans use to summarise other nations, I know that it used to annoy me a lot.

I am fully aware that I'm grouping Americans all together in that statement and I apologise. But what you have to realise is, that it's odd to even meet an American outside of America, all we have to go on is movies, the internet and television. I've been to America a fair few times and I've met some really nice people there, the trouble is they still treated me like a martian and wanted to know how much tea I drank.

Quiero Mota
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
It was less widespread, but it was still around, you're right. I don't know why that is, but it may well be because of the amount of stereotyping Americans use to summarise other nations, I know that it used to annoy me a lot.

I am fully aware that I'm grouping Americans all together in that statement and I apologise. But what you have to realise is, that it's odd to even meet an American outside of America, all we have to go on is movies, the internet and television. I've been to America a fair few times and I've met some really nice people there, the trouble is they still treated me like a martian and wanted to know how much tea I drank.

People actually asked you how much tea you drink? Were these kids your age? I really don't see someone in their 50's asking that, and being sincere.

chillmeistergen
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
People actually asked you how much tea you drink? Were these kids your age? I really don't see someone in their 50's asking that, and being sincere.

Around 30-something.

chithappens
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Around 30-something.

You were in the Northeastern region of the U.S., right?

lord xyz
America is like an alcoholic father who comes to a battle thinking he's going to save the day but instead makes an ass of himself and does more harm than help.

Originally posted by chithappens
You were in the Northeastern region of the U.S., right? He had to be, everywhere else in America think tea is a letter or a golf thing.

Deja~vu
Vote third party and get rid of these puppet masters!

Blax_Hydralisk
Originally posted by lord xyz
He had to be, everywhere else in America think tea is a letter or a golf thing.

Well, tea is for bitches. So I can understand.

Robtard
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Around 30-something.

America is a fairly large country and has a very wide diversity of people, don't judge it as a whole because you happened to visit a few places that didn't agree with you.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Robtard
America is a fairly large country and has a very wide diversity of people, don't judge it as a whole because you happened to visit a few places that didn't agree with you.

I think he already knows that...

Mr Parker
Originally posted by Deja~vu
Vote third party and get rid of these puppet masters!

exactly.well said. thumb up thumb up thumb up rock

Deja~vu
I believe many are thinking this. Oh, and the polls are showing this true. I believe we should for once in our time be bold and not afraid/scared that we are throwing our vote away and make a huge statment!

chithappens
Third parties dont have money so their campaigns would run short

Bardock42
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
People actually asked you how much tea you drink? Were these kids your age? I really don't see someone in their 50's asking that, and being sincere. I-I met 50+ people in the US that asked whether we had seasons in Germany.

lord xyz
Well, Britain doesn't have that season "fall".

Deja~vu
"Third party is the fastest growing party, up to date.

Quiero Mota
Originally posted by Bardock42
I-I met 50+ people in the US that asked whether we had seasons in Germany.

That's really weird. Well, you've been to Phoenix; we don't have any seasons, so maybe they were asking from a relative standpoint. Green and flowers, red falling leaves, and white winter landscapes are nonexistent in Maricopa County. I was stationed in Germany for six months, so I know better.

chithappens
Obama is currently on CNN talking to over 6000 minority journalists. This guy is an incredible speaker and he seems very confident in how he articulates his actions and previous statements.

Croatoa
We'll eventually hate anyone who comes after Bush, for a time within their administration at least. Picking up what Bush drops is not going to be a very dazzling job.

Grand_Moff_Gav
Originally posted by chithappens
Obama is currently on CNN talking to over 6000 minority journalists. This guy is an incredible speaker and he seems very confident in how he articulates his actions and previous statements.

Hitler was an amazing speaker too...

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Hitler was an amazing speaker too...

Hopefully they'll have more in common . . . like quickly repairing the nation's economy.

Grand_Moff_Gav
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Hopefully they'll have more in common . . . like quickly repairing the nation's economy.

Hmm, but Hitler was only able to do it on the basis that the country was heading for war...war-economies cannot be sustained in peacetime...

Bardock42
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Hmm, but Hitler was only able to do it on the basis that the country was heading for war...war-economies cannot be sustained in peacetime...

War economies don't seem to have helped the US in the last 8 years.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Bardock42
War economies don't seem to have helped the US in the last 8 years.

Because we don't have Hitler or Obama yet hmm

Bardock42
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Because we don't have Hitler or Obama yet hmm Touche.

chillmeistergen
Originally posted by Robtard
America is a fairly large country and has a very wide diversity of people, don't judge it as a whole because you happened to visit a few places that didn't agree with you.

I understand that, of course. I was just trying to elaborate on why there maybe anti Americanism, in the U.K and elsewhere.

For instance, if I was to turn on my 360 now and play on xbox live and speak on the microphone, within minutes I'll be called a 'British ***'.

Robtard
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I understand that, of course. I was just trying to elaborate on why there maybe anti Americanism, in the U.K and elsewhere.

For instance, if I was to turn on my 360 now and play on xbox live and speak on the microphone, within minutes I'll be called a 'British ***'.

Well, the ignorant and arrogant fat American stereotype isn't completely non-deserved.

LoL, that's typical online-game courage, I've been insulted by Brits and Scotts many a time because I spoke english with an American accent, can't use that as system of measure. The worst are the Puerto Ricans imo, bunch of shit talking simians. A very close second are the wannabe gangsta caucasian boys.

Grand_Moff_Gav
Originally posted by Robtard
Well, the ignorant and arrogant fat American stereotype isn't completely non-deserved.

LoL, that's typical online-game courage, I've been insulted by Brits and Scotts many a time because I spoke english with an American accent, can't use that as system of measure. The worst are the Puerto Ricans imo, bunch of shit talking simians. A very close second are the wannabe gangsta caucasian boys.

Umm I apologise for jumping in...but since when were Scots not Brits?

(Ignorance)

Robtard
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Umm I apologise for jumping in...but since when were Scots not Brits?

(Ignorance)

Maybe I'm wrong (I am), I meant to differentiate between players from England and players from Scotland.

shiv
In sport all officials make bad calls.
The officials who take time to consider all the facts before making a game defining call receive our respect. whether or not they reach the right decision, Refer to the Womens Wimbledon final 2008.

Officials who make a bad call rashly are hated by all. Refer to The 2006 Champions League final

Obama appears to be a look before you pull the trigger type of guy.

Grand_Moff_Gav
Originally posted by Robtard
Maybe I'm wrong (I am), I meant to differentiate between players from England and players from Scotland.

English and Scots.

Brits are Welsh, Scottish, English, Ulstermen and Irish...

jaden101
Originally posted by Bardock42
War economies don't seem to have helped the US in the last 8 years.

when economics only work for a country when the money being invested in equipment is being spent on manufacturers inside your own country....YAY FOR OUTSOURCING

Bardock42
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
English and Scots.

Brits are Welsh, Scottish, English, Ulstermen and Irish... I think usually not the Irish. At most the watered down Northern ones (as you said)...and those, as we can all agree, are factually English anyways.

Grand_Moff_Gav
Originally posted by Bardock42
I think usually not the Irish. At most the watered down Northern ones (as you said)...and those, as we can all agree, are factually English anyways.

There are people in Northern Island with British on their passport who do call themselves Irish...

And how do you come to that conclusion?

Bardock42
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
There are people in Northern Island with British on their passport who do call themselves Irish...

And how do you come to that conclusion?

So? That doesn't mean that you call Irish (certainly not the ones from Ireland) people Brits.

And I came to the conclusion cause it pisses them off...DUH

Grand_Moff_Gav
Originally posted by Bardock42
So? That doesn't mean that you call Irish (certainly not the ones from Ireland) people Brits.

I meant the Irish people of Northern Ireland.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
I meant the Irish people of Northern Ireland.
Yeah, you should read back what I said.

lord xyz
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
There are people in Northern Island with British on their passport who do call themselves Irish...

And how do you come to that conclusion? Wouldn't they go under Ulsterman, like you mentioned independantly from the Irish?

Grand_Moff_Gav
Originally posted by lord xyz
Wouldn't they go under Ulsterman, like you mentioned independantly from the Irish?

Catholic people in Northern Ireland tend to style themselves as Irish while Protestants are more for Irish or Ulstermen...

shiv
I like the way irish and scottish people talk pirate

lord xyz
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Catholic people in Northern Ireland tend to style themselves as Irish while Protestants are more for Irish or Ulstermen... I'll coincide with you that they are Irish, but I disagree with the implication that Ulstermen aren't Irish and the two are mutually exclusive. Infact, calling them Ulsterman would be just as contreversial as calling them Irish since only 6 of the 9 counties make up Northern Ireland.

Personally, I would've called them "Northern Irish".

Grand_Moff_Gav
Originally posted by lord xyz
I'll coincide with you that they are Irish, but I disagree with the implication that Ulstermen aren't Irish and the two are mutually exclusive. Infact, calling them Ulsterman would be just as contreversial as calling them Irish since only 6 of the 9 counties make up Northern Ireland.

Personally, I would've called them "Northern Irish".

That would have been easier perhaps- however the fact remains that there are people in Northern Ireland who call themselves Ulstermen and dont want to be called Irish in anyway and there are people who prefer to be known as Irish...its a curious thing based on the catholic-protestant split.

KidRock
Why would Obama vote NO to an amendment that would prohibit undocumented immigrants convicted of aggravated felonies, domestic violence, stalking, violation of protection orders, crimes against children, or crimes relating to the illegal purchase or sale of firearms, from gaining legal status.

Robtard
Because all Muslim are just that and they'll have a harder time blowing up America if they're illegal, duh.

Edit: You realize that McCain also voted against it too, the Cornyn Amendment (SA 1184 to S. 1385)?

lord xyz
Originally posted by KidRock
Why would Obama vote NO to an amendment that would prohibit undocumented immigrants convicted of aggravated felonies, domestic violence, stalking, violation of protection orders, crimes against children, or crimes relating to the illegal purchase or sale of firearms, from gaining legal status. Everyone deserves a right to be a citizen. Unless you're one of those countries where no one commits that kind of behaviour...haha.

red g jacks
good article. i think you missed the point a bit with the thread title but still an interesting read.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Everyone deserves a right to be a citizen. .....no. if felons from our own country can't vote i don't see why felons from other countries should be granted citizenship.

Grand_Moff_Gav
Originally posted by red g jacks
good article. i think you missed the point a bit with the thread title but still an interesting read

The thread title was the title of the article.

Schecter
Originally posted by Robtard
Because all Muslim are just that and they'll have a harder time blowing up America if they're illegal, duh.

Edit: You realize that McCain also voted against it too, the Cornyn Amendment (SA 1184 to S. 1385)? *kidshmuck silently sidesteps out of thread*

KidRock
Originally posted by Robtard
Because all Muslim are just that and they'll have a harder time blowing up America if they're illegal, duh.

Edit: You realize that McCain also voted against it too, the Cornyn Amendment (SA 1184 to S. 1385)?

McCain is the same as Bush! McSame! 4 more years of Bush!

(McCain and Obama voted for the same thing? But..I thought McCain was just like Bush? Wouldnt that make Obama like Bush as well?! OH NOES!)

McCain sucks illegal immigrant cock, we all know that.

And well Obama..Obama will suck a homeless mans cock in a back alley for votes.

Originally posted by Schecter
*kidshmuck silently sidesteps out of thread*

Great, Shitcter is here.

KidRock
Isnt Obama all about "fair"?

So why are we raising taxes on a group of people who already pay 60% of the countries taxes?

Fair!

red g jacks
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
The thread title was the title of the article. oh my bad then.. i guess i just assumed when entering the thread that it was going to be about americans rejecting obama rather than the general anti-american sentiment in europe.

but since the article was written from a european perspective i guess the title is fitting.

Grand_Moff_Gav
oHXYsw_ZDXg

Here is quite an interesting video released by the McCain campaign...

dadudemon
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
oHXYsw_ZDXg

Here is quite an interesting video released by the McCain campaign...

HAHA! What a load of rubbish. That video failed to point out that Obama wants to rid Americans foreign oil dependency through higher standards of fuel efficiency requirements and alternative fuels.

No to offshore drilling? WTF?


Why the hell is that a bad idea? I don't want more oil. How about raising taxes on gas and giving companies like Tesla Motors grants? hmmmm?

lord xyz
Originally posted by red g jacks
good article. i think you missed the point a bit with the thread title but still an interesting read.

.....no. if felons from our own country can't vote i don't see why felons from other countries should be granted citizenship. Well I think felons should vote, but how does voting = citizenship?

Deja~vu
Osama might get elected and have Hillary as his vice pres,...then he might get assassinated, then we will have a woman pres. Possible, ya know. First time a Black man and a woman ran..........people might go for this, if not third party.

Robtard
Originally posted by KidRock
McCain is the same as Bush! McSame! 4 more years of Bush!

(McCain and Obama voted for the same thing? But..I thought McCain was just like Bush? Wouldnt that make Obama like Bush as well?! OH NOES!)

McCain sucks illegal immigrant cock, we all know that.

And well Obama..Obama will suck a homeless mans cock in a back alley for votes.


I understand, you tried to show Obama as some villain for his stance on something, it's shown that McCain (your current hero and new last hope for the future) has the same stance, ergo, you're a silly biased ass. So you reply with the only thing left in your arsenal, nonsense rabble. Have another Bud on me, champ.

Robtard
Originally posted by dadudemon

Why the hell is that a bad idea? I don't want more oil. How about raising taxes on gas and giving companies like Tesla Motors grants? hmmmm?

Not bad, or give companies that come up with viable alternative sources disgustingly huge tax breaks, let the free market solve the problem. It has a better chance than the government.

Devil King
Originally posted by KidRock
Isnt Obama all about "fair"?

So why are we raising taxes on a group of people who already pay 60% of the countries taxes?

Fair!

What group might that be?

dadudemon
Originally posted by Robtard
Not bad, or give companies that come up with viable alternative sources disgustingly huge tax breaks, let the free market solve the problem. It has a better chance than the government.

That's actually an even better idea. That would be like giving the federal finger to companies like Exxon Mobile who literally refused to listen to the share holders pleas for alternative energy investments.

KidRock
Originally posted by Devil King
What group might that be?

The top 5% earners in the country.

red g jacks
Originally posted by lord xyz
Well I think felons should vote, but how does voting = citizenship? voting doesn't = citizenship

it = one of the basic rights of citizenship. so if we take that away we are reducing one's citizenship. another basic right garanteed by the constitution is the right to gun ownership. this is another right denied to ex felons.

i agree with you that felons should be allowed to vote, i disagree that we have any obligation to grant anybody who isn't from here citizenship, especially if they have a questionable past. i only used the comparison to demonstrate our country's current attitude towards our own ex felons, which is that they are generally citizens to a lesser degree.

so the notion that felons from other countries have a 'right' to be citizens here when innocent people are turned away every day is just laughable. citizenship to one particular country isn't a 'right' to anyone who isn't from that country.

chithappens
Originally posted by Devil King
What group might that be?

You know the cute thing is that in any form of civilization, all the capital works together.

The rich are rich because of the many people who are not as "well off."

Today, the rich are rich because of the poor (through the system of capitalism).

We all pay taxes. They cut more than a quarter of my check before I even see it so I don't give a damn.

Grand_Moff_Gav
Originally posted by KidRock
The top 5% earners in the country.

Well...we are all amongst the top 5% earners in the world anyway...so its not too bad!

lord xyz
Originally posted by red g jacks
voting doesn't = citizenship

it = one of the basic rights of citizenship. so if we take that away we are reducing one's citizenship. another basic right garanteed by the constitution is the right to gun ownership. this is another right denied to ex felons.

i agree with you that felons should be allowed to vote, i disagree that we have any obligation to grant anybody who isn't from here citizenship, especially if they have a questionable past. i only used the comparison to demonstrate our country's current attitude towards our own ex felons, which is that they are generally citizens to a lesser degree.

so the notion that felons from other countries have a 'right' to be citizens here when innocent people are turned away every day is just laughable. citizenship to one particular country isn't a 'right' to anyone who isn't from that country. Wasn't the whole idea of going to America, starting new lives and forgetting the past? I mean, it's on the statue of liberty, is it not? In any case, anyone can change their ways, they went to your country because they hated theirs so much and wanted to start a new life, why not give it to them?

dadudemon
Originally posted by lord xyz
Wasn't the whole idea of going to America, starting new lives and forgetting the past? I mean, it's on the statue of liberty, is it not? In any case, anyone can change their ways, they went to your country because they hated theirs so much and wanted to start a new life, why not give it to them?

Right, because everyone is reformed when they come to America, just like they are reformed when they come to the UK. They NEVER commit any of the same crimes they committed in their own countries or abroad.


ooor, maybe I'm missing your sarcasm?

inimalist
Originally posted by KidRock
The top 5% earners in the country.

it is so odd, to me at least, how people who are not part of this 5%, will never be part of this 5%, are actively harmed by this 5% and have completely different political/social/moral interests than this 5% ultimately become personally offended by the idea that they may pay more taxes.

you have the biggest heart of them all Kid Rock. The very same people who hope you never become wealthy are the very same you want to keep money and power. That IS what Jesus would do. Of all the problems affecting people that are in a similar situation to yourself, you selflessly promote the issues of the very few elites, at the expense of yourself and everyone else in your situation. Such sacrifice, such care for minorities.

St. Kid Rock perhaps?

Robtard
He should have one of those Bud Light "All American Hero" commercials done in his honor.

red g jacks
Originally posted by lord xyz
Wasn't the whole idea of going to America, starting new lives and forgetting the past? I mean, it's on the statue of liberty, is it not? In any case, anyone can change their ways, they went to your country because they hated theirs so much and wanted to start a new life, why not give it to them? er... don't think anything about reforming felons is on the statue of liberty.. last time i checked it's "give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses longing to be free..". But even if it was on the statue of liberty that was a different point in time. give us your poor then, sure, becuase then we could use the boost in the work force. obviously we can't support an infinite amount of people so that promise would have to end at some point.

as for modern day we haven't reached the limit but we have reached the point where we can certainly do without the felons along with a large portion of the unskilled workers. like it or not that's how it works.

inimalist
BUrcYtF-1NU

Devil King
Originally posted by KidRock
The top 5% earners in the country.

What you expect me to do is answer this question like a communist or a socialist that say that that 5% earn so much that they need to pay more than I do because I make less than 250,000 or 100,000 dollars a year. But the problem is that those 5% pay way less of a percentage of their millions or billions than you or I do on our hundreds or thousands. When you butt the figures up against each other the numbers are certainly impressive in regards to the taxes paid by that 5%, but the numbers should be much further apart than they are.

I'll toss out a nice liberal figure for you to consider, just to make you happy. The oil industry has posted a 12 Billion dollar profit for the last year. Many people would say that no one is considering that they have to pay into 401K's or share-holder investment or that they spend millions in alternative fuel research. But that is simply not the case. There's a reason that 12 billion dollar number is being called "profit". And if the Wall Street figures are doctored to neglect the money spent on operating costs or research or stock-holder returns, then the industry is guilty of lying and selling itself to investors under false pretense. Now, why don't you compare the percentage of taxes they pay to the percentage of taxes you pay on your yearly income. Not to mention the hundreds of millions of dollars that aren't reported from the get-go. I'm unaware of a legal tax shelter that involves paying off middle-eastern oil suppliers.

I'm not saying that Obama is going to take the White House ansd solve all our problems. He's just running on the ticket that makes a few less bones about stealing our money and raping the economy in the process while not giving one damned thing back. At least a few poor kids will attend college until the Republicans get back into office and charge them twice what their education is worth in interest. If you're old enough, you'll notice both sides of this election are calling for change while espousing the same tired old, useless-ass rhetoric of just about every other campign of the last 40 years.


What disturbs me the most about this country is that the "little guy" on both sides agree on what needs to happen but both sides refuse to act accordingly. If you want change then storm Washington DC with a million pissed off home-loaners and take the government back. But until then, we olny have two options. And I, personally, prefer the one that is going to do more for me.

KidRock
Originally posted by chithappens
You know the cute thing is that in any form of civilization, all the capital works together.

The rich are rich because of the many people who are not as "well off."

Today, the rich are rich because of the poor (through the system of capitalism).

We all pay taxes. They cut more than a quarter of my check before I even see it so I don't give a damn.

And the even cuter thing is the poor actually have jobs because of the rich CEO's and businessmen in the country.

chithappens
sad It is amazing that people generalize so easily

inimalist
Originally posted by KidRock
And the even cuter thing is the poor actually have jobs because of the rich CEO's and businessmen in the country.

what is the point you are making?

so you agree that the rich align to concentrate power in the elite, but this is ok because it provides employment to those who can never access that power?

maybe I'm reading this wrong...

chithappens
Lately, I've quit making post on most topics because the generalizations are getting out of hand. The post seem contradictory to general logic but yeah...

inimalist
lol, it is an election year

KidRock
edit

KidRock
Originally posted by KidRock
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) on Friday announced an "Emergency Economic Plan" that would give families a stimulus check of $1,000 each, funded in part by what his presidential campaign calls "windfall profits from Big Oil."

The first part of Obama's plan is an emergency energy rebate ($500 to individual workers, $1,000 to families) as soon as this fall.

"This rebate will be enough to offset the increased cost of gas for a working family over the next four months," Obama said. "Or, if you live in a state where it gets very cold in the winter, it will be enough to cover the entire increase in your heating bills. Or you could use the rebate for any of your other bills or even to pay down debt."

Separately, Obama's plan includes a $50 billion stimulus package that his campaign claims would save more than 1 million jobs.

Half of the money would go to state governments, which are facing big budget shortfalls, and half would be used for national infrastructure, including replenishing the Highway Trust Fund, rebuilding roads and bridges, and repairing schools.

Obama announced his plan 27 minutes after a Labor Department report showed unemployment hit a four-year high of 5.7 percent in July - the highest rate since March 2004, when it was 5.8 percent.

"We need to do more," Obama said in a statement. "That's why today I'm announcing a two-part emergency plan to help struggling families make ends meet and get our economy back on track.

McCain reacted to the surprisingly dour jobs report with a two-paragraph statement: "Across this country, Americans are hurting and today's job numbers are just the latest reminder of the economic challenges we face. ... Unlike Sen. Obama, I do not believe that raising taxes is the answer to our economic problems. There is no surer way to force jobs overseas than to raise taxes on businesses.

Obama announced his plan for a windfall profits tax on oil companies on June 9 in Raleigh, N.C., as he launched a two-week economic tour after clinching the Democratic nomination.

Friday's proposal says Obama "is proposing to offset the cost of his emergency energy rebates over the next five years by enacting a windfall profits tax on big oil companies."

"Obama simply asks that big oil companies contribute a reasonable share of the windfall profits they receive from high oil prices over the next five years to pay for emergency assistance for families right now," the campaign says.


Werent Democrats against the stimulus package?


Originally posted by inimalist
what is the point you are making?

so you agree that the rich align to concentrate power in the elite, but this is ok because it provides employment to those who can never access that power?

maybe I'm reading this wrong...


The point is people always whine about the "rich getting rich off the poor" yet nobody seems to realize the poor actually have jobs because of the rich, the door swings both ways.

dadudemon
Originally posted by KidRock
Werent Democrats against the stimulus package? Obviously not enough to stop it. 313

Quiero Mota
Why did you quote yourself right after you first typed it?

Originally posted by KidRock

The point is people always whine about the "rich getting rich off the poor" yet nobody seems to realize the poor actually have jobs because of the rich, the door swings both ways.

How does a single mother waiting tables have that job because of the rich?

inimalist
Originally posted by KidRock
The point is people always whine about the "rich getting rich off the poor" yet nobody seems to realize the poor actually have jobs because of the rich, the door swings both ways.

by saying "the door swings both ways" you seem to be insinuating that the rich and the poor are equal partners in this deal.

at the very least, don't you think the minority elite who gain billions in personal income benefit more than those who receive the jobs, making it not so much the door swinging both ways, but more of a doggie door, or table scraps?

dadudemon
I just read his quote...I thought he was quoting himself from a long time ago.


Anyway, taxing big oil companies does not piss me off in the least.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by dadudemon
I just read his quote...I thought he was quoting himself from a long time ago.


Anyway, taxing big oil companies does not piss me off in the least.
But the oil companies will just pass on the cost of the tax to us. sad

KidRock
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But the oil companies will just pass on the cost of the tax to us. sad

Exactly, it sounds all wonderful in fairytale land until the price of gas shoots up as a result of this.

lord xyz
If only people were compassionate enough to give to the poor on their own.

chithappens
Part of the problem is the lassier faire approach since Bush got in office. There is no regulation or no ceiling for what they do. $12 billion record oil revenue from 2007 was no mistake.

inimalist

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by lord xyz
If only people were compassionate enough to give to the poor on their own.

I don't have enough money to give to the poor. wink

Grand_Moff_Gav
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I don't have enough money to give to the poor. wink

You have enough money for a computer and an Internet connection though...

Robtard
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
You have enough money for a computer and an Internet connection though...

Outdated comp he got for free and he steals the Wi-Fi.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
You have enough money for a computer and an Internet connection though...

Originally posted by Robtard
Outdated comp he got for free and he steals the Wi-Fi.

Robtard knows me too well. laughing

Grand_Moff_Gav
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Robtard knows me too well. laughing

Ach, somehow Im not surprised haha.

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Ach, somehow Im not surprised haha.

I just need people to buy my CD. wink

dadudemon
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But the oil companies will just pass on the cost of the tax to us. sad


If Americans continued their feverish efforts to avoid paying for gas then, no, it wouldn't. It would force companies like Exxon Mobile to listen to the ****ing shareholders. If no one's buying their refined petroleum products, how can they recoup their tax costs?


I'd gladly tolerate gas prices at $8 a gallon...just give me a fuel cell car or an electic car.

Yes, I can pay the few extra bucks a month for "green" energy. (wind power).

I'm just tired of gas.

Edit-For a fuel cell car and an air car, you don't need anything but a water supply or an air supply. They have vending machine sized machines that can make the hydrogen for your fuel cell. no expression

We just need the car companies to have a big enough incentive to make fuel cell cars.

inimalist
I didn't think gas consumption was going down in lieu of high prices...

dadudemon
Originally posted by inimalist
I didn't think gas consumption was going down in lieu of high prices...

But hybrid car sales aren't getting weaker...which was my point.

I wonder what will happen with Tesla Motors once their $30,000 "sedan" type of car becomes available?


Originally posted by dadudemon
THis one is fecking hilarious!

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/suv.png

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by dadudemon
If Americans continued their feverish efforts to avoid paying for gas then, no, it wouldn't. It would force companies like Exxon Mobile to listen to the ****ing shareholders. If no one's buying their refined petroleum products, how can they recoup their tax costs?


I'd gladly tolerate gas prices at $8 a gallon...just give me a fuel cell car or an electic car.

Yes, I can pay the few extra bucks a month for "green" energy. (wind power).

I'm just tired of gas.

Edit-For a fuel cell car and an air car, you don't need anything but a water supply or an air supply. They have vending machine sized machines that can make the hydrogen for your fuel cell. no expression

We just need the car companies to have a big enough incentive to make fuel cell cars.

I have a hybrid car, but $8 gas would brake me.

Devil King
Originally posted by KidRock
Werent Democrats against the stimulus package?





The point is people always whine about the "rich getting rich off the poor" yet nobody seems to realize the poor actually have jobs because of the rich, the door swings both ways.

What do you whine about?

Not all democrats were against it. But, I would ask you what good it has done for our quickly tanking economy?

dadudemon
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I have a hybrid car, but $8 gas would brake me.


Don't you think a demand for another alternative would increase to rioting** levels with gas at $8 a gallon?

The demand is there, already. Getting around the corruption is the hard part. I know it sounds kookie but the big oil companies do not want alternative energy vehicles readily available. If the demand for gas decreases drastically, where does that leave their $12 billion quarterly profits? Products related to the petroleum industry would go down as well. Oil production would decrease to try to keep the prices up as much as possible. Our reliance on foreign oil would decrease drastically and, EGADS, increase our own domestic exports.

What America and the world needs is a paradigm shift on transportation energy sources. You know what's sad? We've already had the paradigm shift in many different climes of energy production...but we just continue to fail to massively execute the new thinking on energy.

So, to sum up, I think $8 a gallon would help very nicely to motivate us towards other energy sources. I don't think we'd be hearing shit like "yeah, we plan on having 3 out of 5 production models being hybrids by 2018" and the like. Yes, that wasn't a direct quote of anyone, but it is a mockery of the kind of shit we hear from the major car manufacturers. Why can't 3 out of 5 vehicles be fuel cell vehicles by 2018? It certainly is possible. It is MUCH cheaper to install a hydrogen energy-based infrastructure than it is to maintain and increase production and distribution requirements for petroleum based energies. FACT! mad

Just thinking about that shit is pissing me off. mad

Did you know that just one quarter of profits from Exxon Mobile is all it would take to bring the entire hydrogen infrastructure to the VAST majority of American cars! Yes, you read that right. In the long run, it would be much much much much cheaper to have a hydrogen fuel structure than it would to just meet the needs for petroleum energies. Broken record, I know...BUT IT PISSES ME OFF!


Don't you think Americans want that? Cleaner, more efficient, more useful, easier to maintain, and less costly energy source for just about every American car owner?

Can you imagine that your water bill becomes your new gasoline bill? Can you imagine having a vending machine sized hydrogen fuel production system that you can also purify your water with? (I saw a dude give a demo on a video where the same machine used to make the hydrogen fuel for the cars could also put out some highly purified water used in the electrolysis process.) Dude, you and I both know "big oil" does not want our own "gas" pump in our garage. Municipally owned water sources would earn more money for the respective municipalities. Hmm, more money in the hands of smaller governments and less money in the hands of big business.



I know at first my sentiments seemed short sighted and reactionary, but now you can see that it is the exact opposite. What I said could very well be the catalyst needed to start the energy shift.

*Freudian slip or was that a little hidden joke for those paying attention?

**Hyperbole

KidRock
Originally posted by Devil King
What do you whine about?

Not all democrats were against it. But, I would ask you what good it has done for our quickly tanking economy?

Probably no good at all..so why is Obama supporting ANOTHER one? Or an even WORSE one that will bite us in the ass even more when the oil companies raise their prices.

Devil King
Originally posted by KidRock
Probably no good at all..so why is Obama supporting ANOTHER one? Or an even WORSE one that will bite us in the ass even more when the oil companies raise their prices.

There is no "probably" about it. I assume he's calling for one because he's running for office and he's seen what a government pay-off has done for the people who thought it up; i.e. Mr Bush and his cronies. Despite this president and this congress enjoying record low approval ratings, they seem to think that such policy is the only thing that has kept their numbers in the black. I guess if the government wasn't handing out 400 dollar checks to the voters then their numbers would be in the negative. In fact, Mr. Obama's support of the plan, as well as many congressional democrats can be looked at as little more than pandering. However, the difference in the two candidates' approach is that one will keep the people running to their mail boxes for their refund check, while the other is interested in cutting the cost of existing. Both candidates have said that they wouldn't raise taxes and both have been forced to admit that their policy requires more money. However, only one of them is interested in raising taxes to contuine the forceful raping of the middle class; the average guy. While the other will raise taxes and the little guy will get something back from it.

And don't expect the price of transportation to drop at all. It doesn't matter if we fuel our vehicles with gasoline or liquid sunshine, the price won't drop too much as long as we're used to the cost. A gallon of gas could cost 8 bucks but so could a gallon of sugar water. The price is set by the company, not the president. What matters is a president and congress that won't allow the fuel industry to bend us over that 100 dollar barrel of oil they're selling to us.

KidRock
Originally posted by Devil King
There is no "probably" about it. I assume he's calling for one because he's running for office and he's seen what a government pay-off has done for the people who thought it up; i.e. Mr Bush and his cronies.

So you assume Obama is bringing it up because of why? Because he saw what the stimulus package did for Bush and how it made him look good..thats Obama's reasoning?


Originally posted by Devil King
However, the difference in the two candidates' approach is that one will keep the people running to their mail boxes for their refund check, while the other is interested in cutting the cost of existing.

What do you mean by this? I get what you mean by Bush's package is to keep people distracted and going to their mailbox..but what is Obama interested in cutting the cost of? Certainly not energy..

Originally posted by Devil King
Both candidates have said that they wouldn't raise taxes and both have been forced to admit that their policy requires more money. However, only one of them is interested in raising taxes to contuine the forceful raping of the middle class; the average guy. While the other will raise taxes and the little guy will get something back from it.

McCains tax cuts will equal out to a 2% decrease in family income tax while Obama's average cut will only come out to .3%. I don't understand how anyone could actually believe Obama will be cutting anything. Everyday on the news its "Obamas billion dollar spending plan, Obama plans billions of dollars to help save _____..never mind the billions national health care will cause us.

As for the little guy, I am not a fan of Socialism and redistribution of wealth.

Originally posted by Devil King

And don't expect the price of transportation to drop at all. It doesn't matter if we fuel our vehicles with gasoline or liquid sunshine, the price won't drop too much as long as we're used to the cost. A gallon of gas could cost 8 bucks but so could a gallon of sugar water. The price is set by the company, not the president. What matters is a president and congress that won't allow the fuel industry to bend us over that 100 dollar barrel of oil they're selling to us.

Supply and demand has plenty to do with the price of oil and gasoline in this country. It's too bad the Democrats decided to "go on vacation" instead of voting on the bill to accept off shore drilling and raise the supply (lowering the price). This isnt exactly surprising because like you said Congress is seeing one of its worst approval ratings ever now that everyone is noticing the Democrats really are doing NOTHING with all their new seats and aren't changing a thing.



And the President has nothing to do with an independent oil company, so why is Obama giving himself the right to steal their profits away?

lord xyz
The oil companies won't raise their prices, and if they do, shop somewhere else.

dadudemon
Originally posted by KidRock
Supply and demand has plenty to do with the price of oil and gasoline in this country. It's too bad the Democrats decided to "go on vacation" instead of voting on the bill to accept off shore drilling and raise the supply (lowering the price).


Fail.


Supply and demand are just a portion what influences how much you pay at the pump.


Other than that, I don't have any disagreements about the dems failing at what their friggin jobs where they were supposed to be fulfillng some of the primary reasons they were voted for.

KidRock
Originally posted by dadudemon
Fail.


Supply and demand are just a portion what influences how much you pay at the pump.


Other than that, I don't have any disagreements about the dems failing at what their friggin jobs where they were supposed to be fulfillng some of the primary reasons they were voted for.

So how is that a 'Fail."? It is exactly what I said champ.

I never said supply and demand has EVERYTHING to do with it. Of course there are taxes as well.


Originally posted by lord xyz
The oil companies won't raise their prices, and if they do, shop somewhere else.

If the government starts stealing their profits away..yes they will raise their prices.

Mr Parker
Many people wont hate him if he get gets elected,some will.one thing that's guaranteed is the nest president that gets in there will be worse than the previous one.that's always been the case dating back to the days since Lyndon Johnson that each president was worse than the previous one,more evil and corrupt than their predecessor.

The one exception is Carter and the only reason he got in is because they wanted to give americans hope again for the future because they were coming off the watergate scandal and everybody had lost trust and faith in their elected officials and the white house.So they got Carter in office cause they needed someone the world could believe in again.Carter at first was anti government but then he found out that the president doesnt run the country and is just a puppet in the whole scheme and he later became corrupt as well and changed to pro big government.so again,whoever gets in will be even worse,they always are.

lord xyz
Originally posted by KidRock
So how is that a 'Fail."? It is exactly what I said champ.

I never said supply and demand has EVERYTHING to do with it. Of course there are taxes as well.




If the government starts stealing their profits away..yes they will raise their prices. Then people will get oil from other places.

I think what's more likely is that if the tax is too high, they'll protest.

dadudemon
Originally posted by KidRock
So how is that a 'Fail."? It is exactly what I said champ.

It isn't exactly what you said. Do you honestly think that the oil companies are going to increase oil out put by off shore drilling? Do you honestly think that they are going to churn out billions of more barrels so that you can pay $1 for a gallon again?

Exactly.


There's a nice median between "socialize all programs and down with big business" and "any type of socialism sucks and no restrictions on big business".

Of course, very few people are on each pole, but most people lean towards one side or the other.

Dude, off shore drilling won't do jack diddly squat except give some people warm fuzzies and make money for someone else.

Also, I didn't say fail because I think you failed horribly. I said fail because I was being lighthearted. You should know that by now. I guess I should have used a smilie.



Originally posted by KidRock
I never said supply and demand has EVERYTHING to do with it. Of course there are taxes as well.

My point wasn't all that different, indeed. But it was to show that supply and demand play a smaller role than you think. Your post acts like it is a big part of it but really, it is very small. The more I learn about it, the smaller its part seems to play. (ZOMG! run fer da hillz, conspiracy theory insinuation!!!! laughing )






Originally posted by KidRock
If the government starts stealing their profits away..yes they will raise their prices.

Not necessarily. It is likely, though. It is in the oil companies best interest to prevent oil prices from rising too high because that will cause the shift to alternative energy sources even faster. It is inevitable that they will virtually perish, but being the greedy bastards that they are, they will draw it out as long as possible.

However, it's too damn late. wink

Blinky
I am sure that most of the people voting for Obama don't even know his policies well. All they know is that he is out to "Change" things with his magic wand. So... there is a strong possibility that they will be surprised once he is actually president, even IF he decides to follow his pre-election agenda

dadudemon
Originally posted by Blinky
I am sure that most of the people voting for Obama don't even know his policies well. All they know is that he is out to "Change" things with his magic wand. So... there is a strong possibility that they will be surprised once he is actually president, even IF he decides to follow his pre-election agenda


Dude, most people who vote for who they vote for don't know most of their candidates policies. What's even worse, those same "most people" know even less about the opposing candidates.fear

Blinky
Originally posted by dadudemon
Dude, most people who vote for who they vote for don't know most of their candidates policies. What's even worse, those same "most people" know even less about the opposing candidates.fear

Good point, maybe I gave the average American too much credit when I said "... don't even know his policies well". They probably don't know many of his policies to begin with.

Blax_Hydralisk
Or any of their policies.

If I were old enough to vote I'd vote Obama because

A) He's black. B) His speeches are intresting. C) Even if he becomes President he's not really going to do shit to help th Country much... but neither will Mccain. But A and B still apply.

Meh. I just don't really have much faith in our countries politics, or any countries politics for that matter,

inimalist
KoY4iTnl9Cw

Mr Parker
Originally posted by Blinky
I am sure that most of the people voting for Obama don't even know his policies well. All they know is that he is out to "Change" things with his magic wand. So... there is a strong possibility that they will be surprised once he is actually president, even IF he decides to follow his pre-election agenda

very good point.People will find out that just because what he SAYS he will do and what he WILL do when he gets in office are two different things.They got to remember he's just a puppet and doesnt run the country and will do whatever they ask of him.when you get that high up to where your a serious candidate for the presidency,you've been compromised and did some horrible and terrible things to get there.Thats the only way you get that high up to get elected,so yeah you can take that to the bank that he'll never follow his pre-election agenda.None of them ever do.

chillmeistergen
Please, go back and rot in the conspiracy forum.

Robtard
I didn't think gas consumption was going down in lieu of high prices...

It is, people are driving less because of it. They're not going on pleasure rides, they're walking when they can, public transport is up etc. etc. etc.

The bad side of this, less gas being sold means less income (taxes) for road work projects (at least in the US), the US Highway trust fund is ****ed, there's predictions that it will run dry in late '09. Which besides the obvious **** in the ass for Americans, Congress has at times used it as a cookie-jar because it normally has a huge surplus of billions, now that's gone too.

Whomever wins the presidency in '08, they're going to have years of cleanup work because of the last eight. I bet the conservatives pass the buck onto Obama if he wins.

inimalist
Originally posted by Robtard
It is, people are driving less because of it. They're not going on pleasure rides, they're walking when they can, public transport is up etc. etc. etc.

ha, cool, that can't be bad

Originally posted by Robtard
The bad side of this,

oh...

Originally posted by Robtard
less gas being sold means less income (taxes) for road work projects (at least in the US), the US Highway trust fund is ****ed, there's predictions that it will run dry in late '09. Which besides the obvious **** in the ass for Americans, Congress has at times used it as a cookie-jar because it normally has a huge surplus of billions, now that's gone too.

oh wonderful, our already inadequate roads are going to degenerate more...

I'm a little happy to live in a socialist country today...

Originally posted by Robtard
Whomever wins the presidency in '08, they're going to have years of cleanup work because of the last eight. I bet the conservatives pass the buck onto Obama if he wins.

God, I can't wait until its over though

chillmeistergen
Do you guys pay road tax in the U.S? As in do you buy a tax disk once a year?

lord xyz
A few days ago, I awoke one morning and thought, maybe Obama is a false hope kind of thing. That all his talk about change, was to attract all those non-voters to vote for him, and that he really has the same agenda as the rest, that if all this elite, conspiracy stuff is true, then Obama was placed there to once again lie to the public, and make them think that good things are happening, even though they aren't, like that whole Iraq and Vietnam thing, except now it's about healthcare and politics.

chillmeistergen
Thanks for that insight into your clearly brilliant mind.

Grand_Moff_Gav
Originally posted by lord xyz
A few days ago, I awoke one morning and thought, maybe Obama is a false hope kind of thing. That all his talk about change, was to attract all those non-voters to vote for him, and that he really has the same agenda as the rest, that if all this elite, conspiracy stuff is true, then Obama was placed there to once again lie to the public, and make them think that good things are happening, even though they aren't, like that whole Iraq and Vietnam thing, except now it's about healthcare and politics.

Well...what did you expect?

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Thanks for that insight into your clearly brilliant mind.

laughing

inimalist
Originally posted by lord xyz
A few days ago, I awoke one morning and thought, maybe Obama is a false hope kind of thing. That all his talk about change, was to attract all those non-voters to vote for him, and that he really has the same agenda as the rest, that if all this elite, conspiracy stuff is true, then Obama was placed there to once again lie to the public, and make them think that good things are happening, even though they aren't, like that whole Iraq and Vietnam thing, except now it's about healthcare and politics.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f11/t489206.html

wink

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by lord xyz
A few days ago, I awoke one morning and thought, maybe Obama is a false hope kind of thing. That all his talk about change, was to attract all those non-voters to vote for him, and that he really has the same agenda as the rest, that if all this elite, conspiracy stuff is true, then Obama was placed there to once again lie to the public, and make them think that good things are happening, even though they aren't, like that whole Iraq and Vietnam thing, except now it's about healthcare and politics.

False hope is slightly better than certain doom at least.

Robtard
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Do you guys pay road tax in the U.S? As in do you buy a tax disk once a year?

We have vehicle registration once a year, it's the little sticker we place on the upper right hand corner of our license plate, the year one. I don't think the cost is as high as you pay though (my three vehicles are 11, 11 and 8 years old, yet I paid $124.00 for the highest), but part of that money goes into state road work, I believe. Our Highway Trust Fund is supported by the 18-19 cent tax on each gallon.

chillmeistergen
Originally posted by Robtard
We have vehicle registration once a year, it's the little sticker we place on the upper right hand corner of our license plate, the year one. I don't think the cost is as high as you pay though (my three vehicles are 11, 11 and 8 years old, yet I paid $124.00 for the highest), but part of that money goes into state road work, I believe. Our Highway Trust Fund is supported by the 18-19 cent tax on each gallon.

Ah right, pretty similar to the road tax system here, then.

Robtard
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Ah right, pretty similar to the road tax system here, then.

I meant "isn't as high", you pay more for your vehicles fee, right?

I used to own a 1964 Cadillac, the fee on that was around $8.00 a year, miss that.

lord xyz
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Thanks for that insight into your clearly brilliant mind. That post wasn't really directed at (people like) you, but nice of you to be an ass for no reason.

chillmeistergen

Robtard
The way ours is factored varies by state, but the only way you're paying anything close to $400.00 is if it's in the right state, it's a new car and it's expensive, but that would go down each year as the vehicle ages.

I'd hate to think what I would have paid in the UK for that Cadillac, had a 7.2 liter engine.

chillmeistergen
Haha, I had a 1.4.

<< THERE IS MORE FROM THIS THREAD HERE >>