Quit yer bitchin' and just read it.

krime13 said:
Hmmm, wasnt the profits made by oil companies last year a new record?Isnt it a fact that US claming 50% of all the oil produced in Iraq? Didnt Halliburton "missplaced " 3.5 billion dollars last year alone , and that is not counting all the projects they were paid for and did not complete? Geopolitics, I think not, more like highway robery.
Click to expand...



Its going to be hard for the US companies to claim 50% of oil out of Iraq. Considering there are UN Sanctions still in place that limit all oil leaving the country period. Plus the fact that France, Russia, and China all have contracts for what accumulates to 56% of Iraq's oil. And these contracts go back to 1997-1999. And I don't think US oil companies will want the US government/military trying to take oil from those three countries. How many countries in the United Nations would argue for those three. And since 2 are nuclear powers, a war with them would be futile for the entire world. Like the old saying goes, it only takes 1 100megaton bomb to destroy the world now. So those oil companies can claim all that they like. But I don't think the current Iraq government or the United Nations would allow contracts negotiated back then to be repealled just because of some US oil companies.
 
Reprogammed said:
Uhh...

Fuck that witch.

This shit comes from the same woman who went after New Jersey widows who were only seeking a Congressional investigation into the 9/11 attacks by calling them "The Witches of East Brunswick" and that they were "Dancing on their Husbands Graves".

She's a hatemongering skank who believes everything the party she sucks dick for (and loves every second of it) will whisper into her ear.


Everytime I read her shit, I slowly feel my own I.Q. dropping.
Click to expand...

1. What Ann Coulter was refering to was the fact that all these women were promoting an ultra-leftist agenda using the deaths of their husbands to gain a platform.


2. And what is your opinion of Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Cindy Sheehan and the rest of the Democrat/Socialist lap dogs?

3. Based upon your above post, she's driven your I.Q. into the cellar. :blsmoke:



Vi
 
420worshipper said:
Don't know if I would throw Pelosi and Sheehan together anytime soon. Have you seen the latest going on between the two.

Sheehan arrested while calling for Bush, Cheney impeachment - CNN.com
Click to expand...

Yes, and I'm loving every minute of it. *lol*

In my above post I was referring to their agendas. :)

Between Pelosi's trip to Syria, her lack of support for funding the troops, and her stance on illegal immigration, etc., and Sheean's overall nuttyness, they are doing great damage to the chances of a democrat victory in '08 ... and that's a GOOD thing. Now if only they will nominate Hillary as their candidate the final nail in the coffin will be driven to the hilt. :blsmoke:

Vi
 
ViRedd said:
Yes, and I'm loving every minute of it. *lol*

In my above post I was referring to their agendas. :)

Between Pelosi's trip to Syria, her lack of support for funding the troops, and her stance on illegal immigration, etc., and Sheean's overall nuttyness, they are doing great damage to the chances of a democrat victory in '08 ... and that's a GOOD thing. Now if only they will nominate Hillary as their candidate the final nail in the coffin will be driven to the hilt. :blsmoke:

Vi
Click to expand...
You slay me, LOL, I think you need a mental tune up.
 
Dankdude said:
So does trying every way not to pay your taxes.
Your worried that the Dems will raise the taxes of those who make over 100K a year.
Click to expand...

I admit ... I try every LEGAL way to avoid taxes. Why should I pay taxes that I don't owe? Legally avoiding taxes is the American Way Dankster.

Yes, I am worried that the Dems will raise taxes, not just on those making 100K plus ... but across the board. Money is used much more efficiently if left in private hands. Private enterprise is not going to build a bridge to nowhere, for example. Raising taxes will stiffle the economy, cause a loss in jobs and productivity. Who wants that ... other than people who don't understand basic economics?

Vi
 
420worshipper said:
Its going to be hard for the US companies to claim 50% of oil out of Iraq. Considering there are UN Sanctions still in place that limit all oil leaving the country period. Plus the fact that France, Russia, and China all have contracts for what accumulates to 56% of Iraq's oil. And these contracts go back to 1997-1999. And I don't think US oil companies will want the US government/military trying to take oil from those three countries. How many countries in the United Nations would argue for those three. And since 2 are nuclear powers, a war with them would be futile for the entire world. Like the old saying goes, it only takes 1 100megaton bomb to destroy the world now. So those oil companies can claim all that they like. But I don't think the current Iraq government or the United Nations would allow contracts negotiated back then to be repealled just because of some US oil companies.
Click to expand...

First of all I think current administration is nutty enough to do just that,cmon, they tried to install missils in Poland. What about the Haliburtons stolan billions?
 
ViRedd said:
I admit ... I try every LEGAL way to avoid taxes. Why should I pay taxes that I don't owe? Legally avoiding taxes is the American Way Dankster.

Yes, I am worried that the Dems will raise taxes, not just on those making 100K plus ... but across the board. Money is used much more efficiently if left in private hands. Private enterprise is not going to build a bridge to nowhere, for example. Raising taxes will stiffle the economy, cause a loss in jobs and productivity. Who wants that ... other than people who don't understand basic economics?

Vi
Click to expand...

Vi how come it is that I have no problem paying my fair share out of the measly 25K a year I make and yet you kick and scream when they pull out what they do out of your pay check??
Then you have the Audacity to say that raising taxes will stifle the economy? Clinton Made the Highest tax increase in US History and under his watch there was an economic Boom? It was when the Administration messed with one company (Microsoft) that was driving the economic boom turned sour. You see the difference between the economic booms (Clinton vs. Bush) is that Clinton's boom actually hit street level (helping out everybody poor and rich), where as Bush's boom only effected the stock market (helping out the rich only). Sorry Vi, your bucket don't hold no water... or as we say in Texas... That dog don't hunt.
 
ViRedd said:
I admit ... I try every LEGAL way to avoid taxes. Why should I pay taxes that I don't owe? Legally avoiding taxes is the American Way Dankster.

Yes, I am worried that the Dems will raise taxes, not just on those making 100K plus ... but across the board. Money is used much more efficiently if left in private hands. Private enterprise is not going to build a bridge to nowhere, for example. Raising taxes will stiffle the economy, cause a loss in jobs and productivity. Who wants that ... other than people who don't understand basic economics?

Vi
Click to expand...
It wasn't the government that came up with the bridge to nowhere, but some inflated congressman that had a brother-in-law in the bridge building business, with, I'm sure, some large kickbacks coming his way. The way congress does business is in a word, "criminal". You scratch my back (vote for my pork) and I'll scratch yours way of doing business in congress has to change. The Basic economics you are referring to only apply to the rich. Raises in taxes would only apply to those making above 20K a year anyway and very little untill you hit 60-80K. The return to the pre-bush tax rates would primarily effect the 100K+ crowd, Hmmmm, are you in this group?
 
Dankdude said:
Vi how come it is that I have no problem paying my fair share out of the measly 25K a year I make and yet you kick and scream when they pull out what they do out of your pay check??
Then you have the Audacity to say that raising taxes will stifle the economy? Clinton Made the Highest tax increase in US History and under his watch there was an economic Boom? It was when the Administration messed with one company (Microsoft) that was driving the economic boom turned sour. You see the difference between the economic booms (Clinton vs. Bush) is that Clinton's boom actually hit street level (helping out everybody poor and rich), where as Bush's boom only effected the stock market (helping out the rich only). Sorry Vi, your bucket don't hold no water... or as we say in Texas... That dog don't hunt.
Click to expand...

1. I don't have a problem paying my "fair share" either, Dank. I just said that I pay taxes that I must and avoid taxes that I don't owe. The problem I have with the income tax is the METHOD of collection and the basic idea of a progressive income tax. The method is totalitarian and the basic idea is Marxism. Hope your clear on my stance now.

2. I don't give a fig what Clinton did. At the end of his second term, we were headed into a recession. The Bush tax cuts solved that problem in spades DESPITE 9-11.

3. Only helped the stock market? Are you nutz!? Home ownership is at an all time high. Interest rates, while inching up, are still close to historic lows. Unemployment in this country is under 5%. And yes ... the DOW hit an all time high last week at 14K. Its not just the "rich" who own stocks Dank. Recent reports show that 78% of Americans are involved in the stock market. That would include folks like Med who receives a union pension. Where do the unions invest their pension money dank? How about other retirement programs ... where's the money? In mutual funds and blue chip stocks, that's where.

Vi

 
medicineman said:
It wasn't the government that came up with the bridge to nowhere, but some inflated congressman that had a brother-in-law in the bridge building business, with, I'm sure, some large kickbacks coming his way. The way congress does business is in a word, "criminal". You scratch my back (vote for my pork) and I'll scratch yours way of doing business in congress has to change. The Basic economics you are referring to only apply to the rich. Raises in taxes would only apply to those making above 20K a year anyway and very little untill you hit 60-80K. The return to the pre-bush tax rates would primarily effect the 100K+ crowd, Hmmmm, are you in this group?
Click to expand...

Now THAT'S what I call thinking out your position before you post. Nice job there Med. It wasn't the government being involved it was "some inflated congressman." I think I see it clearly now Med. Thanks for clearing things up. *lol*

Vi
 
ViRedd said:
Now THAT'S what I call thinking out your position before you post. Nice job there Med. It wasn't the government being involved it was "some inflated congressman." I think I see it clearly now Med. Thanks for clearing things up. *lol*

Vi
Click to expand...
VI, you relate all things individuals do within the confines of Government as "The Government". The Government is you and I, the people. We elect these assholes and give them the power to make these decisions. I believe they have overstepped their authority and are on a criminal crusade to further their own interests. The first thing that needs to happen in congress is to stop funding the insane Bush war. the second thing is to do away with all, and I mean all lobbiests. Then do a public posting of every proposed spending bill with complete transparency, and naming of all sponsors of the bill. Stop presidential signing statements, and hold the malfactors accountable. It is we the people that are letting "our" government get away with this treasonous behavior.
 
medicineman said:
VI, you relate all things individuals do within the confines of Government as "The Government". The Government is you and I, the people. We elect these assholes and give them the power to make these decisions. I believe they have overstepped their authority and are on a criminal crusade to further their own interests. The first thing that needs to happen in congress is to stop funding the insane Bush war. the second thing is to do away with all, and I mean all lobbiests. Then do a public posting of every proposed spending bill with complete transparency, and naming of all sponsors of the bill. Stop presidential signing statements, and hold the malfactors accountable. It is we the people that are letting "our" government get away with this treasonous behavior.
Click to expand...

Except for your stance on the war, I agree with everything you've said in the above statement.

I stand on my previous statement that the private sector can more efficiently use resources (money) than government can. And by your above post, I can see that you agree with that assessment.

Vi
 
ViRedd said:
Except for your stance on the war, I agree with everything you've said in the above statement.

I stand on my previous statement that the private sector can more efficiently use resources (money) than government can. And by your above post, I can see that you agree with that assessment.

Vi
Click to expand...
The private sector cannot and most assuredly would not address all the problems of the citizens. They would be too busy trying to screw each other. Government in all it's inadequecies is far better suited to deal with the social problems of a populace. Have you seen that commercial on TV about the Big business VS small business, where the guy with the magnifying glass looks down at this tiny figure and asks what is that, the other guy says that is a small businessman looking for a loan, the magnifying glass catches a ray of sunlight and sets the small businessmans presentation on fire, the big businessman laughs and says, what a nuisance, or the one where he flips the little guy through the uprites, That is how private enterprise would take care of citizens, a nuisance for sure. No private charity can address the complexities of our citizens. That is how it is in dictatorial countries in So. America and Mexico. The only charity is the Catholic church and they are too busy molesting kids. Why do you think they all want to come here?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

hanimmal
Kamala Harris Launches Her Campaign for President
7 8 9
Replies
173
Views
14K
compassionateExotic
compassionateExotic
hanimmal
AP: US terrorism alert warns of politically motivated violence.
10 11 12
Replies
222
Views
15K
Roger A. Shrubber
Roger A. Shrubber
Jimdamick
Russia & China align
2 3
Replies
49
Views
3K
Friendly_Grower
Friendly_Grower
hanimmal
Joe Biden: My trip to Europe is about America rallying the world’s democracies
Replies
1
Views
548
hanimmal
hanimmal
hanimmal
Lloyd Austin -Biden's pick for Secretary of Defense.
Replies
4
Views
368
Dr.Amber Trichome
Dr.Amber Trichome
Back
Top