I wanna thank Michelle Bachmann

Chip McFlennigan

for setting the record straight, and speaking out against the HPV vaccination, which is strictly prohibited in the Bible.

I don't care what all that goofy, liberal science shit says! Jesus doesn't want your daughters getting the heathen HPV vacc., and neither should you!

Tell them to abstain from sex until the government officially recognizes her relationship with a certificate and contract, colloquially known as marriage. As the Lord says, it is a sacred arrangement. I truly believe that Jesus will protect women from HPV so long as they have intercourse within the confines of marriage.

Discuss.

brianlux

"liberal science shit": Do you really expect to start a constructive discussion with these words? :?

fife

brianlux wrote:

"liberal science shit": Do you really expect to start a constructive discussion with these words? :?

I think he was being sarcastic or at least i hope so.

BinFrog

Jesus...

Lone Drawn Meteor

johnny america wrote:

for setting the record straight, and speaking out against the HPV vaccination, which is strictly prohibited in the Bible.

I don't care what all that goofy, liberal science shit says! Jesus doesn't want your daughters getting the heathen HPV vacc., and neither should you!

Tell them to abstain from sex until the government officially recognizes her relationship with a certificate and contract, colloquially known as marriage. As the Lord says, it is a sacred arrangement. I truly believe that Jesus will protect women from HPV so long as they have intercourse within the confines of marriage.

Discuss.

Discuss? What's to discuss? You said it all, Johnny! She's a peach.

StillHere

johnny america wrote:

for setting the record straight, and speaking out against the HPV vaccination, which is strictly prohibited in the Bible.

I don't care what all that goofy, liberal science shit says! Jesus doesn't want your daughters getting the heathen HPV vacc., and neither should you!

Tell them to abstain from sex until the government officially recognizes her relationship with a certificate and contract, colloquially known as marriage. As the Lord says, it is a sacred arrangement. I truly believe that Jesus will protect women from HPV so long as they have intercourse within the confines of marriage.

Discuss.

she's a piece of work isn't she Mr. America

good job there...politics and religion...just what every good american needs.

and sure jesus will protect us all from HPV...just as god protected mary, right? what a scam that was....man, can you imagine mary's dad falling for that crock of doodie?

disclaimer: recovering catholic, so don't throw stones (or other things) at me

brianlux

StillHere wrote:

and sure jesus will protect us all from HPV...just as god protected mary, right? what a scam that was....man, can you imagine mary's dad falling for that crock of doodie?

Chip McFlennigan

brianlux wrote:

"liberal science shit": Do you really expect to start a constructive discussion with these words? :?

:problem:

Lizard

brandon10

Jesus was gay. He was taking it in the ass long before marriage. Oh, he was liberal too. He would never vote for a piece of shit like Bachmann.

Chip McFlennigan

brandon10 wrote:

Jesus was gay. He was taking it in the ass long before marriage. Oh, he was liberal too. He would never vote for a piece of shit like Bachmann.

You hate America.

Nothingman54

johnny america wrote:

for setting the record straight, and speaking out against the HPV vaccination, which is strictly prohibited in the Bible.

I don't care what all that goofy, liberal science shit says! Jesus doesn't want your daughters getting the heathen HPV vacc., and neither should you!

Tell them to abstain from sex until the government officially recognizes her relationship with a certificate and contract, colloquially known as marriage. As the Lord says, it is a sacred arrangement. I truly believe that Jesus will protect women from HPV so long as they have intercourse within the confines of marriage.

Discuss.

I love u Johnny. Not in a homo way. I'm your new biggest fan. Johnny America 2012!

brandon10

johnny america wrote:

brandon10 wrote:

Jesus was gay. He was taking it in the ass long before marriage. Oh, he was liberal too. He would never vote for a piece of shit like Bachmann.

You hate America.

Nope, I hate right wing America. You have a beautiful country. But it could be so much better.

VINNY GOOMBA

johnny america wrote:

for setting the record straight, and speaking out against the HPV vaccination, which is strictly prohibited in the Bible.

I don't care what all that goofy, liberal science shit says! Jesus doesn't want your daughters getting the heathen HPV vacc., and neither should you!

Tell them to abstain from sex until the government officially recognizes her relationship with a certificate and contract, colloquially known as marriage. As the Lord says, it is a sacred arrangement. I truly believe that Jesus will protect women from HPV so long as they have intercourse within the confines of marriage.

Discuss.

I'm no Michelle Bachman fan at all. But is she speaking out against this vaccine, or was she speaking out against the fact that Rick Perry MANDATED this particular vaccine for 12 year old girls in Texas? I know the latter to be true, Perry admits it, and admits it was wrong of him to do.

Cosmo

To the guys that think Bachmann is fuckable... I hope you don't have a large pasta pot and small animals as pets.

cincybearcat

You know what, every gets on the GOP candidates for being crazy... but we have a president right now that talks of "millionaires" and "billionaires" paying their "fair share" and then wants to raise taxes on families making >$250,000 per year. For all of his smarts, me thinks he failed math class.

Chip McFlennigan

cincybearcat wrote:

You know what, every gets on the GOP candidates for being crazy... but we have a president right now that talks of "millionaires" and "billionaires" paying their "fair share" and then wants to raise taxes on families making >$250,000 per year. For all of his smarts, me thinks he failed math class.

Are you saying he failed math because he's BLACK?!

Caught.

cincybearcat

johnny america wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

You know what, every gets on the GOP candidates for being crazy... but we have a president right now that talks of "millionaires" and "billionaires" paying their "fair share" and then wants to raise taxes on families making >$250,000 per year. For all of his smarts, me thinks he failed math class.

Are you saying he failed math because he's BLACK?!

Caught.

Obama is BLACK????? :shock:

gimmesometruth27

cincybearcat wrote:

You know what, every gets on the GOP candidates for being crazy... but we have a president right now that talks of "millionaires" and "billionaires" paying their "fair share" and then wants to raise taxes on families making >$250,000 per year. For all of his smarts, me thinks he failed math class.

this is the fact. either you want to reduce deficits, or you don't. simple math and common sense says that you simply can not cut enough and get there. we have to have revenue in addition to cuts. if millionaires and billionaires are paying less as a percent of their income, then who is getting screwed? it is not fair to tax a millionaire at 17% and a guy maiking $30,000 at 30%. how fair is that? why protect the few at the expense of the majority?

if you want to cut the deficit, you must raise revenues. and the rich are the ones that can afford to pay a little more. the rich did just fine under the clinton rates, they will do just fine if they went back to the clinton rates...

cincybearcat

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

You know what, every gets on the GOP candidates for being crazy... but we have a president right now that talks of "millionaires" and "billionaires" paying their "fair share" and then wants to raise taxes on families making >$250,000 per year. For all of his smarts, me thinks he failed math class.

this is the fact. either you want to reduce deficits, or you don't. simple math and common sense says that you simply can not cut enough and get there. we have to have revenue in addition to cuts. if millionaires and billionaires are paying less as a percent of their income, then who is getting screwed? it is not fair to tax a millionaire at 17% and a guy maiking $30,000 at 30%. how fair is that? why protect the few at the expense of the majority?

if you want to cut the deficit, you must raise revenues. and the rich are the ones that can afford to pay a little more. the rich did just fine under the clinton rates, they will do just fine if they went back to the clinton rates...

Nice deflect. Tell me how $250,000 = $1,000,000,000 or even $1,000,000 again?

Obama is a liar.

markin ball

cincybearcat wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

You know what, every gets on the GOP candidates for being crazy... but we have a president right now that talks of "millionaires" and "billionaires" paying their "fair share" and then wants to raise taxes on families making >$250,000 per year. For all of his smarts, me thinks he failed math class.

this is the fact. either you want to reduce deficits, or you don't. simple math and common sense says that you simply can not cut enough and get there. we have to have revenue in addition to cuts. if millionaires and billionaires are paying less as a percent of their income, then who is getting screwed? it is not fair to tax a millionaire at 17% and a guy maiking $30,000 at 30%. how fair is that? why protect the few at the expense of the majority?

if you want to cut the deficit, you must raise revenues. and the rich are the ones that can afford to pay a little more. the rich did just fine under the clinton rates, they will do just fine if they went back to the clinton rates...

Nice deflect. Tell me how $250,000 = $1,000,000,000 or even $1,000,000 again?

Obama is a liar.

A "millionaire" is someone who has $1,000,000 in assets, not necessarily someone who makes $1,000,000 a year. I'm not saying all people that make over 250k a year are millionaires by this definition, but I'm sure many of them are when you add up the worth/equity of their real estate, possessions, cash, stocks, etc. But I will conceed that Obama exploits those terms "millionaire" and "billionaire" to make you think and feel a certain way.

cincybearcat

markin ball wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

this is the fact. either you want to reduce deficits, or you don't. simple math and common sense says that you simply can not cut enough and get there. we have to have revenue in addition to cuts. if millionaires and billionaires are paying less as a percent of their income, then who is getting screwed? it is not fair to tax a millionaire at 17% and a guy maiking $30,000 at 30%. how fair is that? why protect the few at the expense of the majority?

if you want to cut the deficit, you must raise revenues. and the rich are the ones that can afford to pay a little more. the rich did just fine under the clinton rates, they will do just fine if they went back to the clinton rates...

Nice deflect. Tell me how $250,000 = $1,000,000,000 or even $1,000,000 again?

Obama is a liar.

A "millionaire" is someone who has $1,000,000 in assets, not necessarily someone who makes $1,000,000 a year. I'm not saying all people that make over 250k a year are millionaires by this definition, but I'm sure many of them are when you add up the worth/equity of their real estate, possessions, cash, stocks, etc. But I will conceed that Obama exploits those terms "millionaire" and "billionaire" to make you think and feel a certain way.

I would bet you some big $ that a lot of people making $250,000 as a family don't have $1,000,000 in assets. It's not like they are keeping all of that every year. In fact, those are the only people spending in this economy, we should be thanking them.

I'm fine with some tax raises, what I would prefer would be a simplified tax code taking out the loopholes. I'd be in favor of an increase tax on capital gains AFTER a certain level. I'm not going to throw out a number as I'm not sure what that should be. but I know it shouldn't be from dollar #1.

StillHere

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

You know what, every gets on the GOP candidates for being crazy... but we have a president right now that talks of "millionaires" and "billionaires" paying their "fair share" and then wants to raise taxes on families making >$250,000 per year. For all of his smarts, me thinks he failed math class.

this is the fact. either you want to reduce deficits, or you don't. simple math and common sense says that you simply can not cut enough and get there. we have to have revenue in addition to cuts. if millionaires and billionaires are paying less as a percent of their income, then who is getting screwed? it is not fair to tax a millionaire at 17% and a guy maiking $30,000 at 30%. how fair is that? why protect the few at the expense of the majority?

if you want to cut the deficit, you must raise revenues. and the rich are the ones that can afford to pay a little more. the rich did just fine under the clinton rates, they will do just fine if they went back to the clinton rates...

this is not exactly adding a new tax on folks with higher incomes, nor raising taxes, as it would amount to a repeal of tax breaks for higher income families and businesses that were put into effect by prior administrations. Obama's plan would eliminate some of the loopholes as well as reinstate a tax rate similar to the rates that we regular folks pay, on those earning greater than $250K per year, which, IMHO is only fair. Why should those who can most afford it get a break simply because you earn more money than I do? (If anything, it should be the other way around.) It shouldn't be a question of how much you earn, but a question of fairness in the tax burden on families across all income levels. That is all.

cincybearcat

StillHere wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

You know what, every gets on the GOP candidates for being crazy... but we have a president right now that talks of "millionaires" and "billionaires" paying their "fair share" and then wants to raise taxes on families making >$250,000 per year. For all of his smarts, me thinks he failed math class.

this is the fact. either you want to reduce deficits, or you don't. simple math and common sense says that you simply can not cut enough and get there. we have to have revenue in addition to cuts. if millionaires and billionaires are paying less as a percent of their income, then who is getting screwed? it is not fair to tax a millionaire at 17% and a guy maiking $30,000 at 30%. how fair is that? why protect the few at the expense of the majority?

if you want to cut the deficit, you must raise revenues. and the rich are the ones that can afford to pay a little more. the rich did just fine under the clinton rates, they will do just fine if they went back to the clinton rates...

this is not exactly adding a new tax on folks with higher incomes, nor raising taxes, as it would amount to a repeal of tax breaks for higher income families and businesses that were put into effect by prior administrations. Obama's plan would eliminate some of the loopholes as well as reinstate a tax rate similar to the rates that we regular folks pay, on those earning greater than $250K per year, which, IMHO is only fair. Why should those who can most afford it get a break simply because you earn more money than I do? (If anything, it should be the other way around.) It shouldn't be a question of how much you earn, but a question of fairness in the tax burden on families across all income levels. That is all.

What are you talking about? People making that much money already pay more than you do. What is fairness? That almost 50% of Americans pay no income tax?

Cosmo

cincybearcat wrote:

You know what, every gets on the GOP candidates for being crazy... but we have a president right now that talks of "millionaires" and "billionaires" paying their "fair share" and then wants to raise taxes on families making >$250,000 per year. For all of his smarts, me thinks he failed math class.

...
How close is your annual income to $250,000.00?
I make less than half of that a year and am doing pretty well... a hell of a lot better than most of my friends who are in the 35K range.
250K a year is a lot of fucking money... and if they are smart, 250,000 x 4 =1,000,000
...
Just sayin'.

StillHere

cincybearcat wrote:

What are you talking about? People making that much money already pay more than you do. What is fairness? That almost 50% of Americans pay no income tax?

in dollars amounts yes, in rates, no...or am i completely wrong?

gimmesometruth27

StillHere wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

What are you talking about? People making that much money already pay more than you do. What is fairness? That almost 50% of Americans pay no income tax?

in dollars amounts yes, in rates, no...or am i completely wrong?

no you are exactly right.

it is about percentage, not dollar per dollar.

a person making $30,000 or less is going to miss that 30% of gross income a hell of a lot more than someone making >$250 k..

Cosmo

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

StillHere wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

What are you talking about? People making that much money already pay more than you do. What is fairness? That almost 50% of Americans pay no income tax?

in dollars amounts yes, in rates, no...or am i completely wrong?

no you are exactly right.

it is about percentage, not dollar per dollar.

a person making $30,000 or less is going to miss that 30% of gross income a hell of a lot more than someone making >$250 k..

...
Also... guess who pays no taxes? Rich people who can afford tax shelters and use loopholes in the tax code to write off a Summer Home in the Hamptons as a business expense.

cincybearcat

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

StillHere wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

What are you talking about? People making that much money already pay more than you do. What is fairness? That almost 50% of Americans pay no income tax?

in dollars amounts yes, in rates, no...or am i completely wrong?

no you are exactly right.

it is about percentage, not dollar per dollar.

a person making $30,000 or less is going to miss that 30% of gross income a hell of a lot more than someone making >$250 k..

No you are exactly wrong. The % of income tax one pays is more as your income level rises.

cincybearcat

http://www.mydollarplan.com/tax-brackets/

gimmesometruth27

cincybearcat wrote:

No you are exactly wrong. The % of income tax one pays is more as your income level rises.

yes, the more you make the percentage rises, but the link you posted is leaving out all of the tax breaks, loopholes, money in offshore accounts and businesses overseas, and other benefits that the wealthy have over the non-wealthy. if you are wealthy and paying 35% you should fire your accountant and tax guy..