I don't vote for a party and always side with the lesser of the two evils. Regarding abortion I support the right to choose. What's confusing about many Republicans is that they are pro-life and yet pro-death penalty at the same time. How does that make any fucking sense?
It is partisan lemmings following partisan rhetoric... simply believe what your party feeds you and argue anything to the contrary...
henry... you are thinking like an independent thinker...
when it comes to things like the hypocracy... what is the most scary to me is not what partisan lemmings think.... but how they come to their conclusions
I don't vote for a party and always side with the lesser of the two evils. Regarding abortion I support the right to choose. What's confusing about many Republicans is that they are pro-life and yet pro-death penalty at the same time. How does that make any fucking sense?
It is partisan lemmings following partisan rhetoric... simply believe what your party feeds you and argue anything to the contrary...
henry... you are thinking like an independent thinker...
when it comes to things like the hypocracy... what is the most scary to me is not what partisan lemmings think.... but how they come to their conclusions
It seems that Republicans are divided over abortion exemptions for rape, incest or to save the life of the mother, with most remaining unconditionally opposed or supporting an exception only when the mothers life is threatened.
What's your stance?
I used to define myself as a republican, but now I am an independent... I really cant stomach going democrat so independent works for me...
I have always like the non-theocratic/non-religious dictatorship parts of the GOP party... abortion tho is often a view that the church should dictate the state... which fundamentally does not seem american...
my personal view is that I have always been anti-abortion... killing is killing... I would never except the killing of my child...
but from a government point of view.... I am pro-freedoms, pro-rights... which means I believe in the right for someone to have the freedom to make the choice to have an abortion or to not have an abortion (that is a choice too).... and this also honors and respects my choice with out me intrusively demanding that everyone make the same choice I would...
If you think about eugenics... perhaps population control and perhaps the development of people's choices being dictated by legal guardians or nanny state... the right to choose not to have an abortion is just as or more important then the right to choose to have one...
also the whole idea of limiting to certain situations is just more regulation and government control and hoops to jump through... more bureaucracy... so what seems like middle ground is actually inviting more government into your life...
It seems that Republicans are divided over abortion exemptions for rape, incest or to save the life of the mother, with most remaining unconditionally opposed or supporting an exception only when the mothers life is threatened.
What's your stance?
I used to define myself as a republican, but now I am an independent... I really cant stomach going democrat so independent works for me...
I have always like the non-theocratic/non-religious dictatorship parts of the GOP party... abortion tho is often a view that the church should dictate the state... which fundamentally does not seem american...
my personal view is that I have always been anti-abortion... killing is killing... I would never except the killing of my child...
but from a government point of view.... I am pro-freedoms, pro-rights... which means I believe in the right for someone to have the freedom to make the choice to have an abortion or to not have an abortion (that is a choice too).... and this also honors and respects my choice with out me intrusively demanding that everyone make the same choice I would...
If you think about eugenics... perhaps population control and perhaps the development of people's choices being dictated by legal guardians or nanny state... the right to choose not to have an abortion is just as or more important then the right to choose to have one...
also the whole idea of limiting to certain situations is just more regulation and government control and hoops to jump through... more bureaucracy... so what seems like middle ground is actually inviting more government into your life...
so sanctity of life unless the person committed a murder, which i understand, but then we all know that there are a number of people who have been killed on death row who were innocent but we won't bother ourselves with that little detail because sanctity of life is just another republican talking point that really doesn't mean anything when you lift a layer or two. it's almost, although nothing is, as ridiculous as the sanctity of marriage bullshit the politicians feed to the nuts to stay in office and keep the gravy train rolling.
so sanctity of life unless the person committed a murder, which i understand, but then we all know that there are a number of people who have been killed on death row who were innocent but we won't bother ourselves with that little detail because sanctity of life is just another republican talking point that really doesn't mean anything when you lift a layer or two. it's almost, although nothing is, as ridiculous as the sanctity of marriage bullshit the politicians feed to the nuts to stay in office and keep the gravy train rolling.
only person have babies. condoms never break, birth control pills are 100%, regular people, even kids, never make mistakes, a woman is never with a guy who says he will take care of the kid only to take off when he hears she's pregnant and she can't afford the kid on her own and so on. this is the religion fueled fantasy world of the rightwinger.
only person have babies. condoms never break, birth control pills are 100%, regular people, even kids, never make mistakes, a woman is never with a guy who says he will take care of the kid only to take off when he hears she's pregnant and she can't afford the kid on her own and so on. this is the religion fueled fantasy world of the rightwinger.
If we all pulled our heads out of Henry Lillys Well used, well lubed ass we would vote independent, We wouldnt allow the media to shove down our throats the two candidates they want us to vote for, There is more than the two partys out there you know.
Oh you didnt know did you? Well back in Henry lillys well used cavity we go.
If we all pulled our heads out of Henry Lillys Well used, well lubed ass we would vote independent, We wouldnt allow the media to shove down our throats the two candidates they want us to vote for, There is more than the two partys out there you know.
Oh you didnt know did you? Well back in Henry lillys well used cavity we go.
These days most Republicans are more concerned with fiscal issues as opposed to social issues. Those of you that frequent the Politics Forum rarely, if ever, social issues are brought up.
Team Obama has to deflect from the economy (I don't know if you are on Team Obama) because of how bad the economy is. Bringing up Rep. Akin in Missouri is a great tactic. The War on Women, Mitt's tax returns, overseas bank accounts, his dog back in the 80's, and that dude he beat up in high school are all great distractions. But at the end of the day will any of those items listed above have any impact on the country.
I'm sure you will agree with me that the voters in November will decide what's important.
Really? So the fact that a man with a net worth of a quarter billion dollars paid a lower effective tax rate, over potentially a ten year span or more, using things like tax havens and 'carried interest' on his filings, legal or otherwise, in comparison to the average middle-class voter who paid a higher average effective rate won't have an effect on the country, particularly who one votes or doesn't do so because of it?
Under Paul Ryan's capital gains tax reform plan, Romney would pay close to a ZERO effective rate!
That's merely a 'distraction' for an informed voter when your potential prospective president, who is a quarter billionaire, pays a lower effective tax rate than you and will have no qualms about reforming tax codes to make things even better for him and his super-wealthy cronies????
These days most Republicans are more concerned with fiscal issues as opposed to social issues. Those of you that frequent the Politics Forum rarely, if ever, social issues are brought up.
Team Obama has to deflect from the economy (I don't know if you are on Team Obama) because of how bad the economy is. Bringing up Rep. Akin in Missouri is a great tactic. The War on Women, Mitt's tax returns, overseas bank accounts, his dog back in the 80's, and that dude he beat up in high school are all great distractions. But at the end of the day will any of those items listed above have any impact on the country.
I'm sure you will agree with me that the voters in November will decide what's important.
Really? So the fact that a man with a net worth of a quarter billion dollars paid a lower effective tax rate, over potentially a ten year span or more, using things like tax havens and 'carried interest' on his filings, legal or otherwise, in comparison to the average middle-class voter who paid a higher average effective rate won't have an effect on the country, particularly who one votes or doesn't do so because of it?
Under Paul Ryan's capital gains tax reform plan, Romney would pay close to a ZERO effective rate!
That's merely a 'distraction' for an informed voter when your potential prospective president, who is a quarter billionaire, pays a lower effective tax rate than you and will have no qualms about reforming tax codes to make things even better for him and his super-wealthy cronies????
Really? So the fact that a man with a net worth of a quarter billion dollars paid a lower effective tax rate, over potentially a ten year span or more, using things like tax havens and 'carried interest' on his filings, legal or otherwise, in comparison to the average middle-class voter who paid a higher average effective rate won't have an effect on the country, particularly who one votes or doesn't do so because of it?
Under Paul Ryan's capital gains tax reform plan, Romney would pay close to a ZERO effective rate!
That's merely a 'distraction' for an informed voter when your potential prospective president, who is a quarter billionaire, pays a lower effective tax rate than you and will have no qualms about reforming tax codes to make things even better for him and his super-wealthy cronies????
There is a fundamental difference between someone who is fiscally liberal and fiscally conservative. Being fiscally conservative I don't assume it is the govt's money and we should "be happy with what they let us keep." I assume it is the individuals money and they should be allowed to do what they please.
As far as the rates he paid. Those are capital gains rates, not income tax rates. Anyone in this country who owns their own business or makes investments pays that rate. That was the same argument we were hearing about Warren Buffett and his secretary. Buffet pays cap gain rates because it is his company/investments. His secretary pays income tax rates because it is the income that Buffett pay her.
The reason I said it is a distraction is because what Romney did with his own money has nothing to do with fixing the country. Unless you are assuming the govt could have put better use to his money than he could.
Really? So the fact that a man with a net worth of a quarter billion dollars paid a lower effective tax rate, over potentially a ten year span or more, using things like tax havens and 'carried interest' on his filings, legal or otherwise, in comparison to the average middle-class voter who paid a higher average effective rate won't have an effect on the country, particularly who one votes or doesn't do so because of it?
Under Paul Ryan's capital gains tax reform plan, Romney would pay close to a ZERO effective rate!
That's merely a 'distraction' for an informed voter when your potential prospective president, who is a quarter billionaire, pays a lower effective tax rate than you and will have no qualms about reforming tax codes to make things even better for him and his super-wealthy cronies????
There is a fundamental difference between someone who is fiscally liberal and fiscally conservative. Being fiscally conservative I don't assume it is the govt's money and we should "be happy with what they let us keep." I assume it is the individuals money and they should be allowed to do what they please.
As far as the rates he paid. Those are capital gains rates, not income tax rates. Anyone in this country who owns their own business or makes investments pays that rate. That was the same argument we were hearing about Warren Buffett and his secretary. Buffet pays cap gain rates because it is his company/investments. His secretary pays income tax rates because it is the income that Buffett pay her.
The reason I said it is a distraction is because what Romney did with his own money has nothing to do with fixing the country. Unless you are assuming the govt could have put better use to his money than he could.
Because in death penalty cases, the state is taking life as retribution for a capital crime.
In an abortion, the life being eliminated is innocent.
Are you too thickheaded to admit that there is a double standard in both left wing and right wing ideology on these two issues? I'd say more so with the right wing because a life is a life regardless
Because in death penalty cases, the state is taking life as retribution for a capital crime.
In an abortion, the life being eliminated is innocent.
Are you too thickheaded to admit that there is a double standard in both left wing and right wing ideology on these two issues? I'd say more so with the right wing because a life is a life regardless
There is a fundamental difference between someone who is fiscally liberal and fiscally conservative. Being fiscally conservative I don't assume it is the govt's money and we should "be happy with what they let us keep." I assume it is the individuals money and they should be allowed to do what they please.
As far as the rates he paid. Those are capital gains rates, not income tax rates. Anyone in this country who owns their own business or makes investments pays that rate. That was the same argument we were hearing about Warren Buffett and his secretary. Buffet pays cap gain rates because it is his company/investments. His secretary pays income tax rates because it is the income that Buffett pay her.
The reason I said it is a distraction is because what Romney did with his own money has nothing to do with fixing the country. Unless you are assuming the govt could have put better use to his money than he could.
Are you serious with this last paragraph?
Do you honestly believe that if the capital gains tax is reduced to zero, or reduced significantly for that matter, which Paul Ryan has openly stated would be his platform, that there will be more income equality and the middle class with strengthen and flourish as both Romney and Ryan keep regurgitating?
Mitt's opponents want his tax returns released to highlight the absurdly low capital gains rate and how someone of his net worth pays a fraction of the effective rate working class individual does. That isn't even touching on the tax havens and other loopholes Mitt's millions were stored in and through and that he clearly is shielding from the public view.
That has EVERYTHING to do with the economy and tax reform.
And Mitt isn't putting the majority of his money to use. He's hoarding it. For all the living millionaires and billionaires doing the same (and I can assure you 99.99% are), that translates into billions of dollars of net worth being held hostage through a tax code that increasingly favors the super-wealthy and will only continue to do so with worsening results with this man as President.
Again, those are the reasons people want his returns released. We don't care so much about his net worth as we do American tax policy where millionaire's and billionaires effective rates that are embarrassingly low in comparison to the average American.
There is a fundamental difference between someone who is fiscally liberal and fiscally conservative. Being fiscally conservative I don't assume it is the govt's money and we should "be happy with what they let us keep." I assume it is the individuals money and they should be allowed to do what they please.
As far as the rates he paid. Those are capital gains rates, not income tax rates. Anyone in this country who owns their own business or makes investments pays that rate. That was the same argument we were hearing about Warren Buffett and his secretary. Buffet pays cap gain rates because it is his company/investments. His secretary pays income tax rates because it is the income that Buffett pay her.
The reason I said it is a distraction is because what Romney did with his own money has nothing to do with fixing the country. Unless you are assuming the govt could have put better use to his money than he could.
Are you serious with this last paragraph?
Do you honestly believe that if the capital gains tax is reduced to zero, or reduced significantly for that matter, which Paul Ryan has openly stated would be his platform, that there will be more income equality and the middle class with strengthen and flourish as both Romney and Ryan keep regurgitating?
Mitt's opponents want his tax returns released to highlight the absurdly low capital gains rate and how someone of his net worth pays a fraction of the effective rate working class individual does. That isn't even touching on the tax havens and other loopholes Mitt's millions were stored in and through and that he clearly is shielding from the public view.
That has EVERYTHING to do with the economy and tax reform.
And Mitt isn't putting the majority of his money to use. He's hoarding it. For all the living millionaires and billionaires doing the same (and I can assure you 99.99% are), that translates into billions of dollars of net worth being held hostage through a tax code that increasingly favors the super-wealthy and will only continue to do so with worsening results with this man as President.
Again, those are the reasons people want his returns released. We don't care so much about his net worth as we do American tax policy where millionaire's and billionaires effective rates that are embarrassingly low in comparison to the average American.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.