State of the Union address

I think he was aiming more toward the industrial revolution and those golden years after WWII.

oh, he must have been talking about that time in america when unions were powerful, marginal tax rates were optimized on the laffer curve, income inequality was minimized, and everyone prospered, even the rich, despite those 70% marginal tax rates on top earners.

nonetheless, he will claim that UNIONS BAD! and 39.6% IS SOCIALISM! :cuss:
 
Oh for fucks sake Buck.....

Guess we got your panties in a bunch. (again)

i asked a clarifying question aimed at your overly vague "longing for the good ol' days" nonsense.

that you view such and say "oh, for fucks sake" tells a story about you having your panties in a bunch at the mere request for the slightest bit of specificity.
 
i asked a clarifying question aimed at your overly vague "longing for the good ol' days" nonsense.

that you view such and say "oh, for fucks sake" tells a story about you having your panties in a bunch at the mere request for the slightest bit of specificity.


Yes Buck I'm full of nonsense but you made me laugh so hard I nearly pissed myself.
Go now and nit pick your bunched up panties.
 
so, what made us americans then?



Cheesus Rice,
Study your American history.
Breaking away from England.
Writing the Constitution.
Creating a economy.
Fighting in WW1 and 2.
i was under the impression that being born within our borders accomplished that.

LOL, Ya.
A lot of lucky immigrants love that new law too.
No one has any respect or has worked to make America is today.
You just want to tie her down with your laws and rules.
Break everyone down until they are all the same.
Socialism will thrive.
 
LOL, Ya.
A lot of lucky immigrants love that new law too.
No one has any respect or has worked to make America is today.
You just want to tie her down with your laws and rules.
Break everyone down until they are all the same.
Socialism will thrive.

so you're telling me that you're mentally retarded. got it.

got any more bill o'reilly books you want to pimp while you're at it?
 
Cheesus Rice,
Study your American history.
Breaking away from England.
Writing the Constitution.
Creating a economy.
Fighting in WW1 and 2.

we need to get back to breaking away from england? that's not really possible anymore, ya know.

we need to get back to writing a constitution? we already have one of those, ya know.

we need to get back to creating an economy? we already have one of those, ya know.

we need to get back to fighting the first two world wars? we already did that, ya know.

i can't believe i am even still humoring you. you must either be drunk, dumb, or both.

but i'm bored, so please send me any more mental retardation that you can muster.
 
LOL, Ya.
A lot of lucky immigrants love that new law too.
No one has any respect or has worked to make America is today.
You just want to tie her down with your laws and rules.
Break everyone down until they are all the same.
Socialism will thrive.

You're so spoiled, you don't even know.
 
Yeah Buck you're right. I gotta be stupid to even respond to your block headed posts.

the guy with the avatar of foxtailed weed, who is pimping o'reilly books and telling me that we need to go back to breaking away from a country that doesn't rule over us, is calling my posts "block headed".

how drunk are you, exactly?
 
It's a foxtail but a 3 eyed bud.
If we don't start paying attention we will be fighting China who would love to rule us.
Check your sugar level Buck. It's high.
 
oh, he must have been talking about that time in america when unions were powerful, marginal tax rates were optimized on the laffer curve, income inequality was minimized, and everyone prospered, even the rich, despite those 70% marginal tax rates on top earners.

nonetheless, he will claim that UNIONS BAD! and 39.6% IS SOCIALISM! :cuss:

I was? beats me! Seems to me that I was talking about the critical state of our union. More specifically the gap between citizens, (not the president and citizens) so that we can meet an agreement that actually fulfills the needs of Americans. The absolute opposite of Obama's speech tonight.

We need a smaller government; period. Anyone who disputes that has not lived in the USA/ is moronic
 
I was? beats me! Seems to me that I was talking about the critical state of our union. More specifically the gap between citizens, (not the president and citizens) so that we can meet an agreement that actually fulfills the needs of Americans. The absolute opposite of Obama's speech tonight.

We need a smaller government; period. Anyone who disputes that has not lived in the USA/ is moronic

inarticulate and not very well thought out.

every nation that does health care for less than we do has way MORE government involvement.

so do tell me more about the need for a "smaller" government. get specific. enough of this inarticulate teenage angst bullshit.
 
inarticulate and not very well thought out.

every nation that does health care for less than we do has way MORE government involvement.

so do tell me more about the need for a "smaller" government. get specific. enough of this inarticulate teenage angst bullshit.
Firstly I AM DRUNK unlike most of your current "adversaries".

Secondly, even being so, my articulation is sufficient you asshole!.

Lastly, Even if there is more govt involvement, that doesn't necessarily mean that the govt should dictate everything.
You know Obama didnt do well...

PS: I'm far from schoolyard angst. We can go there when it comes up but we are nowhere near there currently buddy
 
oh, he must have been talking about that time in america when unions were powerful, marginal tax rates were optimized on the laffer curve, income inequality was minimized, and everyone prospered, even the rich, despite those 70% marginal tax rates on top earners.

nonetheless, he will claim that UNIONS BAD! and 39.6% IS SOCIALISM! :cuss:

Or maybe when goverment did not inhibit the ability to mine coal, pump oil, and over regulate factories to the point that they have. Several thousand coal miners have lost their job in my area due to over extending regulations, is that not a pertinent enough example of over regulation by the current goverment?
 
I'd really love to see some of ya'lls debates on a live TV show, the passion would entertain me for hours lol.
 
OBAMA: "After years of grueling recession, our businesses have created over 6 million new jobs."


THE FACTS: That's in the ballpark, as far as it goes. But Obama starts his count not when he took office, but from the point in his first term when job losses were the highest. In doing so, he ignores the 5 million or so jobs that were lost on his watch, up to that point.
Private sector jobs have grown by 6.1 million since February 2010. But since he became president, the gain is a more modest 1.9 million.
And when losses in public sector employment are added to the mix, his overall jobs record is a gain of 1.2 million.
 
Back
Top