H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Fri 27 May, 2011 06:11 am
@hawkeye10,
Obama went back into campaign mode soon after taking office and he
will say and do anything that increases his odds of getting re-elected.

Obama is now PRO: War, Waterboarding, Wire Tapping... I hear he even likes The FairTax Plan.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 May, 2011 06:20 am
@Renaldo Dubois,
Renaldo Dubois wrote:

I'm your daddy.
And you've had sex with my sister?

That puts your morals on display for all.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Fri 27 May, 2011 06:21 am
@Renaldo Dubois,
Renaldo Dubois wrote:

You can't reason with a sick mind.

You are the one that claimed you molested your daughter.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 27 May, 2011 06:58 am



How's Obama's European Pub Crawl Going?
Gargamel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 May, 2011 09:03 am
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:




How's Obama's European Pub Crawl Going?


WHAT? WE CAN'T HEAR YOU!
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 May, 2011 03:56 pm
Quote:

http://bber.unm.edu/econ/us-tpi.htm
Total Personal Income, U. S. and States: 2010
$12,530,101,184,000 = $12.530 trillion

1.0 trillion/12.530 trillion = 0.07981 or 7.981% = 8.0% of Total Personal Income.

A Flat Tax rate equal 8% and zero other taxes produces 0.08 * $12.530 trillion = $1.0024 trillion in total revenue.

6.05% = 0.0605 = my current equivalent gross tax rate.

0.0605 * $12.530 trillion = $0.758 trillion.

But if Total Personal Income were to increase to $16,569 trillion, then a Flat Tax rate of 6.05% would produce a total revenue of $1.0024 trillion.


A Fair Tax Rate of 23% and zero other taxes is a sales tax on some but not all items sold:
% GISoTI= % of Gross Income (including any prebates) Spent on Taxable Items. For example, the Fair Tax does not tax the sale of used items.
EFT% = Equivalent Flat Tax %.

% GISoTI…………………………… EFT% = % GIoTI x 23%
99……………………………………..22.77
90……………………………………..20.7
80……………………………………..18.4
70……………………………………..16.1
60……………………………………..13.8
50……………………………………..11.5
40……………………………………..9.2
30……………………………………..6.9
20……………………………………..4.6
10……………………………………..2.3

So what would the actual Total Revenue be from a Fair Tax?

0 Replies
 
okie
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 08:37 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:
Quote:
What John Kerry testified to Congress was essentially a lie.
Quote:
Many veterans tried to alert the Pentagon and the public to the problem in the early 1970s at forums sponsored by such groups as Vietnam Veterans Against the War. Most famously, John Kerry, then a leader in the organization, testified on Capitol Hill on April 22, 1971, that U.S. forces had “raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war....”[10]........

JTT, give it up, the Winter Soldier event was in fact primarily an attempt to defraud America regarding Vietnam, and the attempts to discredit the folks that discredited Kerry and Winter Soldier have also failed. This is historical fact.

http://www.wintersoldier.com/staticpages/index.php?page=BoyleLATimes

"How many Winter Soldier witnesses have been proven to be truthful?

The answer is, so far, "only one." Yet even that answer is still provisional, subject to further revelations from official documents yet to be opened to public view."
okie
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 08:52 pm
@okie,
A further thought on Kerry's testimony to Congress in 1971. Unless Kerry can actually find one credible witness to verify what he said, he should apologize personally to every G.I. that served in Vietnam. If on the other hand he witnessed or participated in those activities, then the military should look into stripping him of some of his service awards, etc. I am not sure how that works, but to let the guy get away with what he did to other veterans is criminal.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 09:29 pm
@okie,
Before that, GW Bush must apologize to all the GIs that died and/or were maimed for life for his illegal war in Iraq. It's more recent history, but we all understand you have no ability to remember what the republicans have done to this country. It's called myopia of the brain.

Most people don't give a shite about what happened in Vietnam; that's past history, and even the Vietnamese have more-or-less forgiven the US for our many atrocities in their country.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  3  
Reply Mon 30 May, 2011 09:01 am
@okie,
You do understand that this really happened, don't you okie?

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


Quote:
Of course, you might not want to admit that the Pentagon confirmed over 320 incidents of US atrocities in Vietnam.
The files are part of a once-secret archive, assembled by a Pentagon task force in the early 1970s, that shows that confirmed atrocities by U.S. forces in Vietnam were more extensive than was previously known.

The documents detail 320 alleged incidents that were substantiated by Army investigators — not including the most notorious U.S. atrocity, the 1968 My Lai massacre.


Perhaps you should apologize to Kerry okie since the Pentagon has confirmed 320 incidents with credible witnesses.

Quote:

In addition to the 320 substantiated incidents, the records contain material related to more than 500 alleged atrocities that Army investigators could not prove or that they discounted.

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-vietnam6aug06,1,2479259.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

Don't you think the Pentagon should apologize to all those G.Is personally okie? Or do you not care when the facts are out there and you ignore them?
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 May, 2011 11:24 am
There is an interesting poll out today from Gallup. What caught my eye was this: it was conducted over 15 months (Jan 2010 - Apr 2011) and involved 238,000 interviews. In the end, the poll really said nothing, in my mind.
Those polled were asked if they were active duty/veteran military or not.
Then they were asked whether - on the day they were interviewed - they approved or disapproved of Obama's performance. The approval numbers in the non-military group came in at 48% vs 37% of those serving or having been in the armed forces approving.
Gallup broke the responses down by age in both groups and showed that Obama gets higher approval ratings from younger interviewees then from older ones.
Then Gallup goes into the fine print of their poll:
>They were not able to interview any active duty military person without a land line.
> Active duty personnel who were contacted refused to offer an opinion by a hefty margin (sorry, my note to myself is not clear on that).
> Most vets over 40 tend to be male. Overall, men are less approving of Obama then females who are under represented.

I suspect that some talk show host might try to use this poll to "prove" that our military hates Obama.









Renaldo Dubois
 
  0  
Reply Mon 30 May, 2011 11:29 am
@realjohnboy,
It clearly shows that our military is racist like the Tea Party according to the thinking of the rabid lefties from MSNBC, MediaMatters, Huffpo, etc, etc.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 May, 2011 04:07 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:
Perhaps you should apologize to Kerry okie since the Pentagon has confirmed 320 incidents with credible witnesses.

Quote:

In addition to the 320 substantiated incidents, the records contain material related to more than 500 alleged atrocities that Army investigators could not prove or that they discounted.
Then where are the prosecutions for those atrocities?

Strange, considering all of those atrocities, you would think somebody that had served in the infantry for a year there would have at least heard of one, but in my case, nothing, not even a rumor, parados. I am frankly fed up with you and your ilk that take all of this crap and swallow it as if it is the gospel truth. And that includes John Kerry. From what the guy said to Congress, it is obvious the man is a fraud, and I think a disgrace to the military. At least it is obvious to me And as I have already said about it, if there were so many atrocities as he described, why did he not report the people and the details so that they could have been prosecuted or court martialed? Why? Count me as one that would like to know. You can believe in whatever you wish, parados. You can believe in the tooth fairy for all I care. However, and this a big "however," you should have the decency not to demand that every other human being on the planet also believe in the tooth fairy.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 May, 2011 04:35 pm
@okie,
Okie, you've shown yourself, numerous times, to be a gullible idiot and this is simply another one of those times.

Quote:
Within days, the declassified records show, the White House quietly requested a list of war-crime investigations from the army.[11] The staff at the Pentagon was ready with a lengthy response that reported 213 suspects and included confirmed cases of acts from the litany cited in Kerry’s testimony.[12]

Yet the Nixon administration went ahead with an aggressive backroom campaign to discredit as fabricators and traitors Kerry and other veterans who spoke out about war crimes. The president and White House aides worked closely with a rival organization, Vietnam Veterans for a Just Peace, to publicly condemn the allegations.[13] “The big lie” became the group’s familiar drumbeat.

Years later, the founder of the group would boast, “Americans got the message that a motley crew of exaggerators and frauds didn’t speak for Vietnam veterans.”[14] The impression stuck. By the mid-1980s, the whistle-blowers largely had been silenced, and conventional wisdom held that atrocities in Vietnam were overblown.[15] The controversy resurfaced in 2004, when Kerry ran for president. His old detractors ran ads demanding that he disavow his 1971 testimony, confident they would play to a receptive audience; their efforts contributed to his defeat.[16] All the while, the army had evidence in its files that he [Kerry] had spoken the truth.

parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 May, 2011 05:01 pm
@okie,
Quote:
Ultimately, 57 of them were court-martialed and just 23 convicted, the records show.


Fourteen received prison sentences ranging from six months to 20 years, but most won significant reductions on appeal. The stiffest sentence went to a military intelligence interrogator convicted of committing indecent acts on a 13-year-old girl in an interrogation hut in 1967.

He served seven months of a 20-year term, the records show.

Many substantiated cases were closed with a letter of reprimand, a fine or, in more than half the cases, no action at all.

There was little interest in prosecuting Vietnam war crimes, says Steven Chucala, who in the early 1970s was legal advisor to the commanding officer of the Army's Criminal Investigation Division. He says he disagreed with the attitude but understood it.

Funny, when you hear of more than one... you pretend you still haven't heard of them.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 May, 2011 05:05 pm
@okie,
It's nice that you call this man a traitor Okie.. even though our own military says he was right.
Quote:
WASHINGTON (August 6, 2006) — The men of B Company were in a dangerous state of mind. They had lost five men in a firefight the day before. The morning of Feb. 8, 1968, brought unwelcome orders to resume their sweep of the countryside, a green patchwork of rice paddies along Vietnam's central coast.

They met no resistance as they entered a nondescript settlement in Quang Nam province. So Jamie Henry, a 20-year-old medic, set his rifle down in a hut, unfastened his bandoliers and lighted a cigarette.

Just then, the voice of a lieutenant crackled across the radio. He reported that he had rounded up 19 civilians, and wanted to know what to do with them. Henry later recalled the company commander's response: Kill anything that moves.

Henry stepped outside the hut and saw a small crowd of women and children. Then the shooting began. Moments later, the 19 villagers lay dead or dying.

Back home in California, Henry published an account of the slaughter and held a news conference to air his allegations. Yet he and other Vietnam veterans who spoke out about war crimes were branded traitors and fabricators. No one was ever prosecuted for the massacre.

Now, nearly 40 years later, declassified Army files show that Henry was telling the truth — about the Feb. 8 killings and a series of other atrocities by the men of B Company.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 May, 2011 05:07 pm
@JTT,
JTT, you have not shown yourself to be very connected to reality. Anyway, I will go with what I have observed or did not observe, what I know to be true and what I know to be very likely not true. I come to this subject with real experience, plus experiences of talking to a few Vietnam "wannabes," so I have an advantage of knowing firsthand how some people can be less than honest about their military experiences. Some will invent being in the military or being in combat, when they were not, or they will make up fantastic stories or events that never took place. I cannot explain why some people do this, but it is a phenomena known to exist. This phenomena has been documented and recognized as "phony soldier syndrome" or "Winter Soldier Syndrome." You can read about it in the following.

http://michellemalkin.com/2007/08/08/winter-soldier-syndrome/

"the Left has embraced a small cadre of self-loathing soldiers and soldier wannabes willing to sell their deadened souls for the anti-war cause."
0 Replies
 
Renaldo Dubois
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 May, 2011 05:11 pm
The left only likes the military when a soldier bad mouths the USA. Typical.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 May, 2011 05:11 pm
@okie,
Here.. you can buy the complete files so you don't have to be so ignorant okie..

http://www.amazon.com/VIETNAM-CRIMES-WORKING-GROUP-FILES/dp/6134604917

The military didn't follow up on most of the incidents or referred them to commanding officers that failed to follow up on them. The issue isn't that people didn't speak up okie, many did. The issue is that people like you vilified them for speaking up. You still want to attack them even though our own military in documents now declassified says they were speaking the truth.
Renaldo Dubois
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 May, 2011 05:23 pm
@parados,
No one cares. Everyone knows your agenda is first and foremost, not justice. If justice were your goal then you wouldn't be looking desperately for some trash to throw at your country. I think you should just suck on it until you're satisfied like you sucked on your mommy's tit.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Demand a plan - Discussion by H2O MAN
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 2055
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.17 seconds on 06/21/2021 at 05:22:14