• Boehner caves, agrees to millionaire tax hike
    45 replies, posted
[QUOTE=thrawn2787;38853172]GJ turning a thread about taxes and shit into a gun debate over a joke comment someone made[/QUOTE] Welcome to Sensationalist Headlines. Don't like it? well what are ya gonna do about it.
[QUOTE=Van-man;38853310]Welcome to Sensationalist Headlines. Don't like it? well what are ya gonna do about it.[/QUOTE] Point out that (in this case) you, Van-man, are the problem.
[quote]House Speaker John Boehner has proposed raising the top rate for earners making more than $1 million[/quote] Hey, John, you fuck, [i]this[/i] is what [b]America[/b] voted for by majority. [quote] President Barack Obama, who wants higher top rates for households earning more than $250,000.[/quote] So I do expect this: [quote]has not accepted the offer.[/quote] And I stand behind our President because he is not the reason why America is in the financial pit it is now, it was whoever destroyed our Surplus and plunged us into Trillions of dollars of debt, [i]before[/i] Obama took office for the first time. [editline]16th December 2012[/editline] Oh, and let's not talk about gun control because it has 0 to do with what the thread topic is about, let's wait until the NRA and Obama stand off on the issue, it'll be more interesting then anyway.
[QUOTE=Van-man;38851851]The 2nd amendment is from a time where there was no national law enforcement set-up. There is now.[/quote] This is completely disingenuous and ignores the intent of the founders. Do you not understand the "national" part of national law enforcement? Who do you think guns are supposed to protect us from? You cannot be this dense. [quote]And if you're gonna cry [I]SELF DEFENCE!![/I] then there's better alternatives nowadays like tazers and pepper-spray / bear-mace.[/QUOTE] Self defense from an army requires more than "tazers and pepper-spray".
[b]Stop debating gun control in a thread about the fiscal cliff, thanks![/b]
[QUOTE=T-Sonar.0;38851765]Title should have been, "Boehner becomes flaccid, agrees to millionaire tax hike."[/QUOTE] I would've gone for "Boehner bends to peer pressure"
[I]A great victory for the Obama clan! *Continue Battle*[/I] [MEDIA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tg8cKGBc6dU[/MEDIA]
Hooray! Smart people won!
Haa Haa, republicans are chicken!
[QUOTE=King Tiger;38852170]What? We found out that militias were a bad idea?[/quote] You must have misinterpreted my post. We found out that it was a bad idea to [i][b]rely on state-based militias as our primary means of national defense[/b][/i]. This was pretty well-known by 1794, when President Washington called up the militias of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia to put down the insurgents of the Whiskey Rebellion. He personally led about 13,000 of them and noted that they suffered from disorganization and poor training (especially where officers were concerned). Washington himself was worried about depending on militias as early as the Revolutionary War: [quote=George Washington to the Continental Congress, Sept. 1776][i]To place any dependence on Militia is assuredly resting upon a broken staff. Men just dragged from the tender scenes of domestick life; unaccustomed to the din of Arms; totally unacquainted with every kind of military skill, which being followed by a want of confidence in themselves, when opposed to Troops regularly train'd, disciplined, and appointed, superior in knowledge and superior in Arms, makes them timid, and ready to fly from their own shadows.[/i][/quote] And then there was their extremely poor record during the War of 1812 (when well over 400,000 were mustered) that led to President Madison deciding that the country should utilize professional standing forces in favor of militias. [QUOTE=King Tiger;38852170]We still have state militias, the national guard.[/quote] Yes, that's true. But again, we do not rely on them as our primary means of national defense and security anymore as we originally did. It was that very same reliance on militias to suppress insurrections, repel invasions, and generally act as the bulk of our military which served as one of the most pressing reasons why the Second Amendment was originally adopted in the Bill of Rights in the first place. It wasn't just about self-defense and deterring tyranny, hunting, etc. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("I said stop, take it to Mass Debate in an hour." - BANNED USER))[/highlight]
but will he actually do it? or will he just go "see guys i tried to be reasonable with that socialist obama but he just wouldn't listen!"
[QUOTE=Ltp0wer;38851702]The 2nd amendment isn't for protecting our right to hunt...[/QUOTE] Yep. It protects us from Invasion and Tyranny. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Off Topic, Mass Debate or any other of the gun threads" - BANNED USER))[/highlight]
every time I see this thread title I imagine giant caves full of stalactites in the shape of giant erections. the mysterious boner caves of the north.
Of course you gotta raise taxes. That's what you gotta do after fighting two simultaneous wars + bailing out the banking industry + funding bloated welfare with the Bush tax cuts in place. Any dumb ass can crunch the numbers: [IMG]http://iceimg.com/i/d8/e7/12e3591b82.png[/IMG]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.