Objection isn't to creating jobs. Objection is to raising taxes, which is all Obummer's 'job bill' really is.

1. He's already done this before. He did a 1 trillion dollar bill designed to create jobs for (get ready for it) construction workers, teachers, firemen, policemen, and so forth. What happened to that trillion dollars? Well, about half of it was given to the states, which they used to shore up thier own budget shortfalls. The other half-trillion? "What half-trillion?" says Obama. How about before we give him another half trillion, he accounts for every penny of the first trillion?

2. His previous efforts have not done jack squat - so why would we want to lather-rinse-repeat them?

3. How are a bunch of TEMPORARY 1-year construction jobs supposed to be a 'job bill' that puts America to work? No disrespect to teachers & temporary construction guys - but they aren't the jobs America needs. We need companies hiring scientists, computer programmers, MBAs, and other actual working professionals - not a bunch of temporary construction guys. Obama's bill is a joke because it hires a bunch of temps, and then a year later puts the burden of KEEPING them employed back on the states.

Obama's bill isn't designed to be passed. Even the Democrats rejected it in the Senate. Yeah - the Senate. Democrats. Rejected. Obama's STUPID bill. Not Republicans. DEMOCRATS. His bill isn't designed to pass. It is designed to get stupid idiots like Cunk a platform to say Republicans "hate teachers and jobs". That's all. And it also appears to be useful at getting stupid prog-libs to clap their hands like so many trained seals. Wake up.

Prediction: The OWS movement will influence history about as much as the Tea Party movement did. Both movements show a comparable level of engagement to most presidential election cycles going back 200 years. (Every time it's "life or death like never before.")

SURELY you can't be serious! These OWS ne'er-do-wells are the result of dummy government schools and played up by their limbmedia coaches. They don't know squat, except somehow by magic the government is supposed to sh1t out jobs and "free" money.

Unlike these bums, the Tea Partiers cleaned up after themselves and had to go back to work Monday morning. The people whose taxes pay for everything were shat upon by the lamestream media mucksters and the rest. John Galt where are you?









>> ^chilaxe:

"Is this our Middle Eastern moment, when people rise up..."
Since he's a famous thought leader, let's test his predictive intelligence against our own.
Prediction: The OWS movement will influence history about as much as the Tea Party movement did. Both movements show a comparable level of engagement to most presidential election cycles going back 200 years. (Every time it's "life or death like never before.")
Derive your hope from your own life and your own increasing abilities and knowledge, and not from mass movements

quantummushroom: the only way I can make sense of your definition of freedom is that either you are in the top 1% capitalist class or are completely ignorant of the history of labor and rise of the middle class in America.

This may come as a shock, but you don't have to be in the 1% to be happy or free. Very few of those 1% are inheritors of wealth, they earned it, and the wealth was a byproduct of providing some useful goods or service people wanted. If you're getting your history of these United States from Howard Zinn or lamestream media, yeah, ignorance could be your secret admirer as well.


A third possibility is that you are just duped by Fox News I suppose.

I never watch it. I suspect more liberals watch it than conservatives, for the same reason people who hate Howard Stern listen to him: to see what he says next.

What exactly is a 'liberal scheme" anyway? Can you point to some concrete examples? The labor movement? Affirmative Action? Social Security? Medicare? Do these qualify as schemes?

The labor movement served a valid purpose until it didn't. And no government employee should be in a union. Ever. A scheme is a questionable idea which has revealed itself as existing mostly its own sake, usually by fraud and incompetence. Affirmative action is an insult to minorities. Medicare might have some merit, but the 60 billion dollars it loses to fraud EVERY year makes one question whether it really exists mainly to help people or aw away for government to take over the medical field.

King Obama has ALREADY spent over a trillion in "stimulus". Result: jack squat. Government spending has never been, nor will ever be, the solution.
















>> ^petpeeved:

quantummushroom: the only way I can make sense of your definition of freedom is that either you are in the top 1% capitalist class or are completely ignorant of the history of labor and rise of the middle class in America.
A third possibility is that you are just duped by Fox News I suppose.
What exactly is a 'liberal scheme" anyway? Can you point to some concrete examples? The labor movement? Affirmative Action? Social Security? Medicare? Do these qualify as schemes?

With Republicans standing in 100% opposition to everything Democrats try to pass (even the Republican-lite stuff), what can Obama do about anything the protesters are upset about?

Obama's "plans" (when he has them) are so awful, so incompetent, and so ill-designed that even the Democrats won't vote for them. Obama's so-called 'Job Bill' (really a tax bill) went up for a vote in the Senate last week. The Democrats still control the Senate. So - there was nothing stopping Obama's tax bill from passing the Senate because there was no way the GOP could 'obstruct' it. Awwww - guess what happened? The DEMOCRATS voted against it and it went down in flames because it is just a bunch of stupid ideas he has had fried into his brain between crack hits in college.

And leave us not forget - the Democrats had control of the House for the first 3 years of Obama's presidence, as well as a super-majority of the Senate. GOP 'obstructionism' when they don't control any branch of government? Aside from piddling proceedural delays, the GOP couldn't do squat for almost 30 months. But their agenda was so lousy that even with that majority they were having difficulty not because of the GOP, but because even Democrats couldn't agree with the awful ideas being rammed out by Obama, Pelosi, and Reid.

And as far as the OWS dummies go... You think Obama sees them as anything except useful idiots he can exploit? Most of the things the OWS dislikes were done by Obama and his cronies. Bailouts? Obama. Crony capitalism? Obama. Shielding corporate interests? Obama. Pushing costs onto customer instead of companies? Obama.

Implying that Obama would be able to 'fix everything' if only you get wid of those wascally Wepubwicans is absolute balderdash. The entire political class is to blame - not the GOP as if it was the only party that was corrupt. The way to 'fix' this is to elect Tea Party candidates like Perry or Ron Paul who want to gut government like a sea bass. Cut government down and you remove the ability of companies to 'crony' up to anyone. We don't need a 3 trillion dollar government to fix this. We just need simple, common-sense rules that are ENFORCED and not filled with loopholes that get re-written every election depending on who is in office.

There is no GOP obstructionism. That is a prog-lib myth.

I'm just surprised. It's one thing to know that U.S. corporations don't like paying taxes, but another to read it in the report.

The issue here being that it is government who is picking & choosing who does & doesn't get the plum breaks. It is changing (literally) from election to election. Government should NOT be in the position to be the power-broker who determines what companies/industries get massive subsidies and tax breaks year by year. All that does it create an environment of arbitrary modern patronage where companies are far more beholden to politicians than they are to the public. Think about it. GE could literally fall on its face as a company, but it would be OK because it is getting 'green' money shovelled at it along with tax-breaks, subsidies, and other gimmies. Why should they care jack-squat about whether they manufacture crap that no one wants when they have their CEO on Obama's cabinet?

That's the problem here. Government is the problem. Slap down government. Remove them from the marketplace. Set up a system of basic rules that ALL companies have to obey and that government cannot change and then put the government in a box and lock it away forever.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

I heretofore pronounce that no right-wing person knows anything about freedom or liberty. Only the left understands these concepts.
Lol...
http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/09/29/2430644/nc-gov-perdues-r
emark-strikes.html
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/magazine/94940/peter-orszag-democ
racy
Now - this is just the tip of the iceberg of course. Leftists and neolibs everywhere are very comfortable with the idea of limiting freedoms, reducing choice, and otherwise stomping on personal liberty in the name of thier so-called 'progressive' beliefs. Netrunner - imma callin' you out on this one. You've got it 100% backwards. The people who don't know jack-squat about freedom or liberty are LEFTISTS. They hate freedom. They hate liberty. They want everyone to live under their benevolent heel with freedoms appropriately doled out by themselves. I'm saying it loud and I'm saying it proud. No true neolib understands a thing about freedom. They only want freedom as THEY define it - which means people are free to obey leftist dogma but arrested, insulted, or killed if they dare to believe anything else. Hyperbole? Nope. The worst massacres and genocides in all history were by leftist regimes. Deal with it.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasty_generalization

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy


I expect you to write a 500 word - abstract on each of these concepts. There need to be at least 2 academic sources used per paper. Hmm.

Come to think of it, you should first write an abstract on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review#Scholarly_peer_review just to make sure you understand what is expected of you.

I heretofore pronounce that no right-wing person knows anything about freedom or liberty. Only the left understands these concepts.

Lol...

http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/09/29/2430644/nc-gov-perdues-remark-strikes.html

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/magazine/94940/peter-orszag-democracy

Now - this is just the tip of the iceberg of course. Leftists and neolibs everywhere are very comfortable with the idea of limiting freedoms, reducing choice, and otherwise stomping on personal liberty in the name of thier so-called 'progressive' beliefs. Netrunner - imma callin' you out on this one. You've got it 100% backwards. The people who don't know jack-squat about freedom or liberty are LEFTISTS. They hate freedom. They hate liberty. They want everyone to live under their benevolent heel with freedoms appropriately doled out by themselves. I'm saying it loud and I'm saying it proud. No true neolib understands a thing about freedom. They only want freedom as THEY define it - which means people are free to obey leftist dogma but arrested, insulted, or killed if they dare to believe anything else. Hyperbole? Nope. The worst massacres and genocides in all history were by leftist regimes. Deal with it.

I've seen the vids. The protests is a knut of very old radicals reliving their 'nam glory days, and a bunch of kids just there to feel like they've got a purpose. You've got Cornel, Fonda, Saranden, and other bozos getting people to chant anti-American revolution dogma. You've got these yahoos blocking traffic and sidewalks. It's called "Day of Rage".

A peaceful protest is one where you confine your demonstration to a place where you are not interfering with innocent citizens. The Wall Street yahoos are blocking both foot and road traffic, causing a disturbance, and being a public nuisance. When that happens - boom - the cops show up. When the cops show up in that situation, stuff like this happens. Duh. Protesting is fine - but don't be stupid about it.

And I'm not a Republican. I'm a fiscally conservative, socially libertarian constitutional constructionist. Or - as I like to call it - a FiSCCaL. These protestors are angry at the wrong target. The Wall Street problems (and they are a problem) are merely a symptom of the greater issue. The problem is government which creates an environment of corruption and cronyism. Wall Street couldn't have done squat if government hadn't served up a bunch of exemptions, loopholes, and other shenanigans. Did companies WANT those things? Sure - but they can't HAVE them without a corrupt government. The solution is not to whine about Wall Street. The solution is to slap down government hard, reduce their power, and have simple tax reform like Cain's 9/9/9 plan (moving to a Fair Tax), and eliminate all the pork projects and government 'subsidies' of industry. Limit government and root out federal corruption and you create a system where Wall Street abuses can no longer exist because there is no 'system' for them to abuse.

Not a revolution because the American people want nothing to do with this bullcrap. The radicalism and marxism that is represented by this "Day of Hate" bologna is the province of a few fringe kooks and lunatics - supplemented by a small crowd of easily manipulated skulls-full-of-much fools who don't know jack squat and just want to be 'part of something'.

A revolution takes place when there is a real issue that the majority of a population supports. The anger at Wall Street isn't it. A far more likely revolution is something like the Tea Party, which actually has a large number of people in favor of its core beliefs of reduced government. Sorry guys. The "Day of Hate" is not the revolution. It's just a few malcontents who represent no population of any importance.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I'm going to argue it in a different way and see if it changes your opinion.

I believe the war is maintained not for our safety, not for other nations safety, not to catch terrorists, not to prevent anything, but to directly funnel money into corporate pockets and in turn the very same people who support the war going on via donations and lobbyists.

Now, these same people are more than willing to cut benefits of teachers, government unions, and also seem to keep bringing up social security/medicare/medicaid. Plus the other myriad of programs they want to cut or eliminate........or PRIVATIZE, which is their word for turning public facilities to private gains that the government still has to pay for but has a company squatting over taking profits off the top of everything.

Now, here's where my other argument comes in. What if the tax rate was high enough on every person in these little "money circle jerks" that they couldn't keep enough of it to make it worthwhile and still bribe/donate to people?

I mean look at the ForaTV top15 video right now where he says in the 50s people making over 200k were taxed at 91 percent, so that would basically mean that making 2 million today would be the cut off for the sub 91 percent rate.

It would mean that people getting bribed and making in excess of a million dollars would need more bribe money to get the same benefit. It would mean people doing the bribing would have less money to bribe with.

I mean let's put it this way:

If you were working a job making 100 grand a year. New tax law comes in and now they want to take 75% of earnings after 100 grand. It would effectively make it so that you earning more money at your job would result in almost no benefit to you, so now money is off the table as an effective bargaining tool to use with you. That leaves other things to take into consideration when the money can't really be factored in anymore, and for politicians the only other things I can imagine as bargaining tools would be giving them houses/cars/etc and offering them jobs after their political career.....where they would be limited by the tax rates on their earnings. It'd make me a lot less willing to be a dirtbag if I could only make 1 million dollars versus the 60 some odd million some of these CEOs are getting without the majority of it being taken in taxes.


>> ^blankfist:

>> ^messenger:
>> ^blankfist:
I'm still not sure why people think taxing income is okay. And I'm speaking about federal income tax, not state and local. I think in times like this when the country is running record deficits, it should cut spending instead of looking elsewhere for more money.

So you understand there's a deficit, and the only way to reduce it is increase income (taxes), and/or reduce spending (cuts). Take a look at where the spending cuts are going to come from, and then decide if you want those cuts to be made. Cronyism, imperialism, war and all those other things we both hate are what the government does for fun. Until a true statesman is elected, they're never going to be cut. So what will get cut instead? Things that actually benefit the people living in the country. I'm not American so I don't know what your federal government provides in that regard, but either you're glad those services exist and are happy to pay for them with your taxes, or you need to include them in the list of things you'd like to have cut.

This is the part I don't understand. Yes, there are services that are useful, but the majority of what they spend their money on are immoral things I disagree with that put our lives in jeopardy over here. Wars and occupation have made us less safe. I don't care that they spend some of the money on things I agree with. They spend the most of it on things I don't.
I voluntarily support the ACLU, but if they started drowning kittens, I'd most likely pull my money from them. This is the ideological discussion we should be having about government right now. They're spending more than we as the people can afford and yet both parties are refusing to cut defense spending.
If we cut a large portion of our defense spending (the portion that puts us in overseas entanglements) we might be able to balance the budget and cut income tax completely. Why aren't we having that discussion instead of being defeatists about what the government will cut? Because people in favor of raising taxes are scared that cutting income tax may lead to less entitlement programs, so they're willing to bomb people over it. That's why.

Alas for the field of rational science - it has been hijacked by biased politically motivated cretins. Climate science has been utterly lost, and not content with besmirching that branch alone, the trogs are moving into neurology?

A slightly larger amygdala has been associated with complex social interaction and the ability to move more information into long term memory. Whoopeedoo. The anterior cingulate cortex is associated with error detection, which is nothing more than a simple cognitive function. Again - whoopeedoo. A person with a huge anygdala can have excellent error detection, and just because someone has a bigger ACC doesn't necessarily mean they can perform higher thought for squat.

To imply from this study that Democrats are all complex thinkers and that Republicans don't think at all is in and of itself proof of quite the opposite. Only someone being driven by their basest, most fearful emotions could possibly believe such Gobbelesque tripe. Whatever brains believe that sort of flawed interpretation are certainly NOT being driven by complex thought.

LOL at how the woman acts out "birthing" (squatting, i.e.the natural way) and how the guy does it (somewhere between what he saw on "ER" and porn).

Tags for this video have been changed from 'tutorial, poop, bathroom, japan, squat toilet' to 'tutorial, poop, bathroom, japan, squat toilet, sjimajiro, 90s' - edited by Eklek

I was certainly won over to the Squat N Drops while living in Japan for a couple of years. Not only are they better for preventing hemeroids/vericose veins/colon problems (as mentioned above), but they are also cleaner. That is, the only part of you that touches anything is your shoes, and usually in Japan those are toilet slippers anyway.

One should remember that there is a very wide toilet spectrum in Japan, too, from a hole in the floor to the full Star Ship Enterprise captain's chair (warmed seats, mister, air dryer, mp3 player, you name it...)

@RedSky, @00Scud00, you're both right. The appropriate way to poop is in a squatted posture, but I'm not going back to those days of squatting in the woods. Personally, I keep a stool in each one of my bathrooms to prop my feet up on. It make shitting much more enjoyable and quite a bit faster.