Jump to content

Welcome to The OFFICIAL Pure Pwnage forums
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

'08 Presidential Race (US)


  • Please log in to reply
1712 replies to this topic

Poll: Canidate Poll (207 member(s) have cast votes)

Democratic Canidate?

  1. Obama (130 votes [62.80%])

    Percentage of vote: 62.80%

  2. Clinton (8 votes [3.86%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.86%

  3. Edwards (1 votes [0.48%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.48%

  4. Dodd (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. Kucinich (9 votes [4.35%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.35%

  6. Gravel (3 votes [1.45%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.45%

  7. Richardson (1 votes [0.48%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.48%

  8. Biden (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  9. "I think I'd make a better Presedent" (47 votes [22.71%])

    Percentage of vote: 22.71%

  10. Other canidate (8 votes [3.86%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.86%

Republican Canidate?

  1. Giuliani (8 votes [3.86%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.86%

  2. Romney (6 votes [2.90%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.90%

  3. Huckabee (8 votes [3.86%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.86%

  4. Ron Paul (83 votes [40.10%])

    Percentage of vote: 40.10%

  5. McCain (39 votes [18.84%])

    Percentage of vote: 18.84%

  6. Hunter (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  7. Thomson (1 votes [0.48%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.48%

  8. Tancredo (1 votes [0.48%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.48%

  9. "I think I'd make a better Presedent" (53 votes [25.60%])

    Percentage of vote: 25.60%

  10. Other canidate (8 votes [3.86%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.86%

After the primaries: Would you vote for your chosen democratic or republican canidate?

  1. Democrat (94 votes [45.41%])

    Percentage of vote: 45.41%

  2. Republican (45 votes [21.74%])

    Percentage of vote: 21.74%

  3. Either (38 votes [18.36%])

    Percentage of vote: 18.36%

  4. Another party/ other (30 votes [14.49%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.49%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21
cadetduke

cadetduke
  • GA Private
  • 5,898 posts
  • xfire:cadetduke
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. Louis, Mo
  • Steam ID:cadetduke
  • Xbox / GFWL:cadetduke
  • PSN:A1R5N1P3R
  • Rofl-Rupees:2
  • Gamer Army ID:2069
  • Company:Foxtrot
QUOTE (Dohreguard @ Dec 10 2007, 04:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
but I guess for right now I like:

McCain and Obama

if I'd choose between the 2, it'd be Obama

Wow, that's exaclty how I am leaning.

QUOTE (hackerwacker @ Dec 10 2007, 09:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
if there is any one person that I DON'T want to be elected, it's definitely clinton. thankfully, i think there are enough opposition to her that she won't.....atleast i hope : /

There's enough "open" opposition. But wait for the elections and the people who aren't following politics to come out. They'll see Clinton and vote for her just for the hell of it.
Midwest Gaming - Work in progress.

#22
hackerwacker

hackerwacker
  • Banned
  • 4,590 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Baltimore, MD
  • Interests:Stuff that goes boom
  • Gamer Army ID:220
QUOTE (Muad'dib @ Dec 10 2007, 10:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Ugh, this whole Ron Paul/Libertarian movement is such a fad. So many of the hipster kids who are supporting Ron Paul don't even know wtf he is talking about. Gold Standard? Axing the Fed? Yeah, I'm sure all of his supporters know exactly what he means... icon_rolleyes.gif

The shift toward a free market and isolationism is a knee-jerk reaction to frustration with the government. Sure, we're all pissed, but libertarians go too far. It's an over-reaction, simple as that. Happy mediums are what work, folks.

Oh well, Paul won't win. He's not really anything to worry about because of his lack of support in the traditional conservative bastions.

well i do agree with you on your point about the libertarian fad. as is always the case. alot of people, especially younger people, like to think they are a part of some 'alternative' lifestyle. they see something like the libertarian movement and latch onto it because they think it will make them seem like an intellectual or something.

it's kind of like when teenage girls put 'bicurious' in their myspaces....even though 99% of them have never touched another girl in their life.


that said I still personally would consider myself a libertarian, if only as a general ideology. 9 out of 10 times I will side in favor of personal liberties over bigger government.

#23
DHC

DHC

    e^(i*pi) + 1 = 0

  • Retired Staff
  • 12,731 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Someplace wonderful
  • Gamer Army ID:31
  • Company:Kilo
QUOTE (Muad'dib @ Dec 10 2007, 10:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Ugh, this whole Ron Paul/Libertarian movement is such a fad. So many of the hipster kids who are supporting Ron Paul don't even know wtf he is talking about. Gold Standard? Axing the Fed? Yeah, I'm sure all of his supporters know exactly what he means... icon_rolleyes.gif

The shift toward a free market and isolationism is a knee-jerk reaction to frustration with the government. Sure, we're all pissed, but libertarians go too far. It's an over-reaction, simple as that. Happy mediums are what work, folks.

Oh well, Paul won't win. He's not really anything to worry about because of his lack of support in the traditional conservative bastions.


Theres a big difference between Isolationism and Non-intervention. And if you can't tell the difference, then you really shouldnt be debating the foreign policies of any politicians.

"Happy mediums" are the cynic's way of saying "i dont want change"

#24
VulgaritySocks

VulgaritySocks

    Second only to DougHChrist! | Wisest Poster 08

  • Members
  • 4,423 posts
  • xfire:h00nestr00b
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edmonton
  • Interests:Defenestration, interpretive dance...<br />Dreadlocks?<br /><br />This is stupid.
I fully support the notion to let Bush re-elect himself into a government that hands complete control over all facets of life directly to him. He is a God fearing man and a good American. Besides, I trust the American voting public - they've sure made same good decisions! That Nixon fella, Reagan was a hoot, even Bush Sr. was a hit (but only in a few little brown countries). Even Grant was a good time. So... I'm going to go ahead and assume whatever choice is made, it will be retarded and leave a superior nation once again humiliated by the behaviour of their incompetent leader.
Fatalism is the lazy man's way out...

But anyway... American politics is at least getting interesting again.

QUOTE (Lethanialist @ Dec 10 2007, 03:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I fully support Obama simply for Net Neutrality. He's the only candidate I've heard speak about it, and he is fully for it. He also wants to digitize all government records and whatever is public will be in a searchable database similar to Google. While that may not seem so important now, imagine if there is something that you need to find records on or learn about, it's right there. And Net Neutrality... Don't even get me started on that. Any ISP that wants to shape my traffic (like the one I unfortunately have right now, Comcast) deserves to be shutdown or fined.


Interesting. I didn't know Obama had gotten into this, but his having an opinion like this is very fitting to his chosen persona of "understanding the cool electronic crowd" politician man. Remember that coke mistake?
I don't think putting government records on the Internet will ever actually be possible. We would freak out if we saw some of the shit they've done. Although some stuff wouldn't suprise the more astute (Kennedy and his adventures in the streets of Dallas, anyone?). I think Obama is a very smart man, and that he understands the younger generation far better than anyone else running. Paul has the hipster vote, but Obama has secured something far more interesting - the "electronic generation" vote. So, although it looks unlikely he's going to win, I say he might have more of a chance than some think. The moron Jesus-freaks have their vote, but from what I've seen more people will be voting this year from this fancy new demographic, and Obama is the only guy to tap into it.

QUOTE (DougHChrist @ Dec 10 2007, 03:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Ron Paul would be an excellent President - which is why I voted "either" in your final poll question. Anyone who answers otherwise is voting based on party, which is a very stupid decision


This is the problem I have with politics in general. People never seem to find time to create opinions other than what they have have thrust down their throats like a tatooed phallus by their political party. You're not an "individual" if you're a successful politician, you're a Republican or you're a Democrat. I agree with Doug that voting based purely on these two parties is stupid, but it's so fucking common that it's ridiculous. The voting process has become less of a show of opinion and more of a standing up for what party you believe in hug-fest. That's a major problem to me. The whole thing stinks like a pig in shit.

If I was in the States, I'd probably vote for Ron Paul. The man will at least attempt to make a difference. And for all those people worried about him, don't worry, anybody who tries to improve the world is generally killed pretty quick. So you'll have your chance for your funky little attavistic fun-times in no time at all.
But I like the fact that Paul likes pot, I like the fact he's a Libertarian - which seems to be a dangerous thing to admit to the voting public, although how many have been in office recently? When I look at the States now I see a ridiculously imposssible political situation. The country is like a whale drowning. So what is needed is obviously not creating the same situation that started the problem in the first place. So perhaps having some new ideas, not old, stale, "I am a C- Harvard student" ideas are what is needed.

Because, if the Great American public haven't noticed, those have failed.

Also, if Hillary gets voted in, we're all fucked. The enemies of the States have no real respect for women. This isn't a feminist thing, this is a respect thing. Which still matters to those silly little out-dated buggers. That's my one problem there. Obama I wouldn't mind seeing in there. Other than that, whatever.
Hopefully someone interesting.

And if all else fails, Bush Cheney '08.

#25
Muad'dib

Muad'dib

    Oct 2007 - Mario Kart DS Tournament winner or something

  • Members
  • 2,124 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California
  • Interests:CS, console gaming, basketball, movies.
  • Xbox / GFWL:anucadivad
  • Wii:5446973000736267
QUOTE (DougHChrist @ Dec 10 2007, 10:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Theres a big difference between Isolationism and Non-intervention. And if you can't tell the difference, then you really shouldnt be debating the foreign policies of any politicians.

"Happy mediums" are the cynic's way of saying "i dont want change"


Kinda splitting hairs with the wording, but its essentially what he wants, except for free trade obviously.

Also, I'm not afraid of change. I'm just concerned that we could go to the other extreme too quickly. I mean, a lot of what he's proposing is pretty radical, you have to admit. I think people are supporting him out of frustration and nonconformity, instead of supporting him for what he says.

#26
MacTavish

MacTavish
  • Members
  • 39 posts
  • Location:Kentucky
I personally think we'd be better off if DC was razed to the ground and we had to rebuild w/o any of the current politicians. Not all of them are bad, but too many of them are just in it for themselves and embroiled in scandals and illegal actions and just underhanded bullshit.

Not that I'd like advocate that happening, it would just help us out.

I don't think I've seen a single candidate so far that I would be comfortable voting for. Not one seems to stand on their own chops from what I've seen.

TBH, the whole two party system is what's wrong with the country and politics. Few people vote anymore based off of platform and aim, instead just toeing the party line. It sickens me how people blindly support either, or any, party based solely on a few aspects of it and then defend it and disparage others based off of some fanatical drive that doesn't really accomplish anything more than get people emotionally embroiled in something that needs to have a informed, rational, cogitative decision made.

#27
Master C

Master C
  • Members
  • 5,511 posts
  • xfire:masterca
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, England
  • Xbox / GFWL:Renegade Con
  • Wii:4710238335790963
  • Rofl-Rupees:7
QUOTE (VulgaritySocks @ Dec 11 2007, 07:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Also, if Hillary gets voted in, we're all fucked. The enemies of the States have no real respect for women. This isn't a feminist thing, this is a respect thing. Which still matters to those silly little out-dated buggers. That's my one problem there. Obama I wouldn't mind seeing in there. Other than that, whatever.
Hopefully someone interesting.

And if all else fails, Bush Cheney '08.


We had a female prime minister once. I think she was the most terrifying person on the planet while she ruled. Ah good times......

Anyways I dont follow American politics enough so I will just watch this thread and see if I can pick any info up here.


#28
way2lazy2care

way2lazy2care
  • Members
  • 10,808 posts
  • Xbox / GFWL:way2lazy2care
  • PSN:A1R5N1P3R
I'm not going to decide till each party chooses it's candidates. I probably won't even vote in the primaries (not because I don't want to). I agree with Ron Paul on almost everything economics/public policy etc., but I can't bring myself to vote for anyone that things pulling out of Iraq would be a good idea right now.

He would probably have an almost unanimous vote for the republican party if he didn't have such a firm standing on pulling out.
SPAMBOTSTOOKOVERMYSITE D:
Give me LoL Referals.

QUOTE (Virus52 @ Mar 3 2008, 09:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
ALL HAIL THE GREAT AND MIGHTY MOTH!

QUOTE (SN3S @ May 6 2008, 08:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
No sensuality; this is all for fitness.

#29
DHC

DHC

    e^(i*pi) + 1 = 0

  • Retired Staff
  • 12,731 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Someplace wonderful
  • Gamer Army ID:31
  • Company:Kilo
QUOTE (Muad'dib @ Dec 11 2007, 02:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Kinda splitting hairs with the wording, but its essentially what he wants, except for free trade obviously.

Also, I'm not afraid of change. I'm just concerned that we could go to the other extreme too quickly. I mean, a lot of what he's proposing is pretty radical, you have to admit. I think people are supporting him out of frustration and nonconformity, instead of supporting him for what he says.


Though radical for sure, I can guarantee that not 1 American will be upset with the abolition of the IRS. There are many other candidates in favor of the removal of head tax - heck, the founding fathers originally banned head taxes in the constitution! We had to amend it to allow for individual income tax.

I look forward to the day when the little guy isnt fucked out of his money without choice - though still being taxed similarly in terms of amount, he is not forced to pay it all at a given time. This also encourages the middle class to save money and accumulate wealth, which will strengthen our diminishing middle class. Stretching that a bit, one could argue that it will save this democracy.

I suppose this is more of an argument for Fair Tax, or another similar initiative, rather than for Libertarianism or Ron Paul. But a man can dream icon_smile.gif

#30
DHC

DHC

    e^(i*pi) + 1 = 0

  • Retired Staff
  • 12,731 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Someplace wonderful
  • Gamer Army ID:31
  • Company:Kilo
QUOTE (MacTavish @ Dec 11 2007, 12:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I personally think we'd be better off if DC was razed to the ground and we had to rebuild w/o any of the current politicians. Not all of them are bad, but too many of them are just in it for themselves and embroiled in scandals and illegal actions and just underhanded bullshit.

Not that I'd like advocate that happening, it would just help us out.

I don't think I've seen a single candidate so far that I would be comfortable voting for. Not one seems to stand on their own chops from what I've seen.

TBH, the whole two party system is what's wrong with the country and politics. Few people vote anymore based off of platform and aim, instead just toeing the party line. It sickens me how people blindly support either, or any, party based solely on a few aspects of it and then defend it and disparage others based off of some fanatical drive that doesn't really accomplish anything more than get people emotionally embroiled in something that needs to have a informed, rational, cogitative decision made.


Sadly, we've had a 2 party system since the beginning. As much as our nation's founders didn't want political parties at all, they were bound to take over, and did just as soon as Washington left office. And more than 2 parties? Then you end up with situations like Israel, in which 12+ parties spend all of their time making coalitions in legislature, and instead of doing anything productive, instead focus on halting their opponents' ability to do anything.

I am totally in favor of the violent overthrow of the American government

#31
VulgaritySocks

VulgaritySocks

    Second only to DougHChrist! | Wisest Poster 08

  • Members
  • 4,423 posts
  • xfire:h00nestr00b
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edmonton
  • Interests:Defenestration, interpretive dance...<br />Dreadlocks?<br /><br />This is stupid.
QUOTE (DougHChrist @ Dec 11 2007, 10:55 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I am totally in favor of the violent overthrow of the American government


Interesting. Was this sarcasm or would you actually consider it?
Because I know a little man who lives south of Florida who can help us out...

#32
Dohregard

Dohregard

    Master Dohbator

  • GA Private
  • -32,944 posts
  • xfire:dohreguard
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Kansas City, KS
  • Steam ID:dohreguard
  • Xbox / GFWL:Dohregard
  • PSN:A1R5N1P3R
  • Wii:209737188728753
  • Rofl-Rupees:5
  • Gamer Army ID:3070
  • Company:Foxtrot
Andrew Johnson actually predicted that their would be at least 3 complete overhauls of our political structure by now. And we haven't had a continental congress in..... 200 years?

Dohregard
Crap IT Manager
Flickr
cdyw1.gif


#33
Fin

Fin
  • Members
  • 1,347 posts
QUOTE
in which 12+ parties spend all of their time making coalitions in legislature, and instead of doing anything productive, instead focus on halting their opponents' ability to do anything.

Finland has what? 5-7 parties and they seem to work well together. ofcourse they are all basicly the same, but still.

#34
DarkKitchen

DarkKitchen
  • Members
  • 1,894 posts
  • Gender:Male
I'm not really liking any of the current democrat candidates icon_neutral.gif I want to have someone on both sides to really get into

#35
Dohregard

Dohregard

    Master Dohbator

  • GA Private
  • -32,944 posts
  • xfire:dohreguard
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Kansas City, KS
  • Steam ID:dohreguard
  • Xbox / GFWL:Dohregard
  • PSN:A1R5N1P3R
  • Wii:209737188728753
  • Rofl-Rupees:5
  • Gamer Army ID:3070
  • Company:Foxtrot
QUOTE (DarkKitchen @ Dec 11 2007, 02:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I'm not really liking any of the current democrat candidates icon_neutral.gif I want to have someone on both sides to really get into



John McCain / Obama???

Dohregard
Crap IT Manager
Flickr
cdyw1.gif


#36
Weiman

Weiman

    Best HW&SW Cont. & PP Savant '09

  • Global Moderators
  • 33,900 posts
  • xfire:weiman
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Netherlands
  • Interests:Gaming, Biochemistry.
  • Steam ID:Weiman
  • Gamer Army ID:2452
  • Company:Mu
QUOTE (Dr.Toker @ Dec 10 2007, 11:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Not so much. You do realise she was the one who led the charge against GTA, and violent video games. That was the moment I said i would never vote for her.

That, and like .. think about it. She is saying the same shit as the republicans are saying as far as war goes. Look, I'm all for taking the fight to the T's, but its time to go home from Iraq, and focus on the United States of America.

It is for this reason, I would vote for Ron Paul, or Barak Obama. It is time for change. And both of these candidates represent change. I believe in a balance. Let the right wingers have control for a while, then the left wingers. Its yin yang.




QUOTE (hackerwacker @ Dec 11 2007, 04:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
if there is any one person that I DON'T want to be elected, it's definitely clinton. thankfully, i think there are enough opposition to her that she won't.....atleast i hope : /


Just to clarify, the only reason I'd think it'd be cool if Clinton or Obama won is because it'd be the first 'black' and female president.

A million little aspiring American girls will see their dream shatter before them icon_razz.gif


QUOTE (Weiman @ Apr 5 2009, 01:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This is exactly what has been going on through the entire thread, and it's not the first time either.
You come to us for advice..you just spell out what you want to get, and then ask us if it is okay, and we have to explain why it isn't. That's the world upside down.. If you would just say 'hey guys, I have an X amount of money, what should I buy?' Then this would be over in 2-3 posts, not 2-3 pages.
QUOTE (Kazzerax @ May 21 2009, 09:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Every time someone goes against Weiman's sig I feel like they should be bludgeoned for a few minutes in the head to feel the headache I feel when I realize someone really IS that dense.

#37
frostyx

frostyx
  • Members
  • 111 posts
  • xfire:froststorm256
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mass, USA
QUOTE (Muad'dib @ Dec 10 2007, 10:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Ugh, this whole Ron Paul/Libertarian movement is such a fad. So many of the hipster kids who are supporting Ron Paul don't even know wtf he is talking about. Gold Standard? Axing the Fed? Yeah, I'm sure all of his supporters know exactly what he means...


A lot of his supporters are like that. I'm not a libertarian but I did say he'd be my choice for a conservative canidate cuz libertarianism > republicanism in my book.

Yea and I'd completely agree also, Clinton would be a disaster if she got into office. She'd probably do something to stunt the video game industry, and from there it wouldnt be too far to limit other freedoms of expression. Furthermore I think she's building up off her husband's resume (btw I think Bill Clinton was a great president), which is wrong, and her election would get a ton of modern feminists in power, which would be equally a disaster.

Actually I do think there's a very good chance she'll get chosen in the democratic primaries, unfortunately. All the old people seem to support her, and they vote more than any other group... yes, Obama has an overwhelming amount of support in the younger population, but we as a group also dont vote enouph to make a serious impact (so if you can, go out and vote for him in the primaries, even if your republican, it could keep Clinton out of office)

#38
DHC

DHC

    e^(i*pi) + 1 = 0

  • Retired Staff
  • 12,731 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Someplace wonderful
  • Gamer Army ID:31
  • Company:Kilo
QUOTE (frostyx @ Dec 11 2007, 03:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
so if you can, go out and vote for him in the primaries, even if your republican, it could keep Clinton out of office


you cant do that

you can only vote in the primaries of the party you are enrolled in - at least in all the States i've ever lived in

#39
cadetduke

cadetduke
  • GA Private
  • 5,898 posts
  • xfire:cadetduke
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. Louis, Mo
  • Steam ID:cadetduke
  • Xbox / GFWL:cadetduke
  • PSN:A1R5N1P3R
  • Rofl-Rupees:2
  • Gamer Army ID:2069
  • Company:Foxtrot
QUOTE (Weiman @ Dec 11 2007, 12:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Just to clarify, the only reason I'd think it'd be cool if Clinton or Obama won is because it'd be the first 'black' and female president.

A million little aspiring American girls will see their dream shatter before them icon_razz.gif

haha that is a valid point.

QUOTE (DougHChrist @ Dec 11 2007, 03:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
you can only vote in the primaries of the party you are enrolled in - at least in all the States i've ever lived in

Speaking of this, doesn't that also keep people from having an open mind as to who they want to be president since they are "locked" into one party? I mean, let's say I'm a democrat and all of the democrat candidate's suck ass so I want to vote for a Republican. Then I might as well stay home and not do anything until election day since I can't even vote in the primaries.
Midwest Gaming - Work in progress.

#40
ST1DinOH

ST1DinOH

    Master Debater 08

  • Members
  • 7,272 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:toledo ohio
  • Interests:fireworks, weed,
QUOTE (DougHChrist @ Dec 11 2007, 12:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Though radical for sure, I can guarantee that not 1 American will be upset with the abolition of the IRS. There are many other candidates in favor of the removal of head tax - heck, the founding fathers originally banned head taxes in the constitution! We had to amend it to allow for individual income tax.

I look forward to the day when the little guy isnt fucked out of his money without choice - though still being taxed similarly in terms of amount, he is not forced to pay it all at a given time. This also encourages the middle class to save money and accumulate wealth, which will strengthen our diminishing middle class. Stretching that a bit, one could argue that it will save this democracy.

I suppose this is more of an argument for Fair Tax, or another similar initiative, rather than for Libertarianism or Ron Paul. But a man can dream icon_smile.gif


if you want the IRS to be removed don't vote dem.

they are huge on taxes, raising them, re-newing them, and creating them.

it's fucking communism-light. theft by legislation.

if you don't think the IRS is worthless then ask yourself this...

when's the last time you felt "charitable" on april 15th

the excuse is this money helps the poor and what not...but private organizations do a much better job through charity.

the figure on feeding and helping the poor is just insane when you compare and contrast the efficiency of voulenteers vs government assistance.

you gotta figure anything state run has a ton of employees that need to be paid.

the guy ladeling out free soup on the weekends doesn't take home a paycheck.

it's obvious money is better spent through charities than having the peter pan governmnet do it for us.

it's just class envy TBH. they think anyone with money should be punished for thier sucess...if this gets any worse what would be the motivation to achieve anything in this country anymore...

look what they've done to the medical industry in this country...now they want to socialise it to "fix" the problem they created with thier trial lawers who run for president/vice president.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users