Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] there are no black helicopters...

[Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Vern Green wrote:

> > How many have died in Iraq?  100,000+ Iraqis because of the war, so 
> > far, and 2,000+ US soldiers.  That's large-scale killing.
>
> Yeah, And? The war in Iraq was important, Saddam had to be removed, how 
> many more UN resolutions, bah, why bother.

First, Saddam did not have to be removed.  That was Bush's idea and it was 
opposed by most nations.  Containment was the favored strategy.  Why 
bother with more UN resolutions?  It could be the $500 billion in savings, 
the 2000+ US soldiers lives, the 100,000+ Iraqi lives, the lives of other 
allied soldiers, the limbs and brains of our soldiers or maybe our 
international reputation.  What do you think?  Screw all that, full speed 
ahead!


> > Cheating?  Lying?  Look at the lead-up to the war in Iraq.  There was 
> > tons of deceipt there.  I'm not going to waste my time writing down 
> > details for someone who doesn't care.  If you want to know about it, 
> > you'll read about it.  There's tons of information out there.
>
> Like? Tons? There was no WMDs? Is that the only thing you can point at?

I wasn't even thinking of WMDs.  Go read for a few months and get back to 
me.


> No connection to the terrorists?

No connection to 9/11 terrorists.  There are lots of terrorists all over 
the world and we are less able to deal with them because of the Bush 
boodogle in Iraq.


> Whatever Mike, there are tons of evidence pointing to the other side as 
> well, but you choose to ignore it in your single-minded and close-minded 
> purpose. There has to be people like me out there keeping your rabid 
> views inline.

Thank God for the Christian right wing.  Where would we be without them? 
Oh, I know, we'd have much lower national debt, good international 
reputation, reasonable tax policy, low corruption, 2000+ US soldiers 
brought back to life, and a few extra babies aborted, maybe, or maybe not.


> Here we go with the wealthy not paying their share? I tell you what, why 
> don't you tell us what you think that share should be? Want a 
> percentage? How about just a flat amount.
>
> Everyone wants to say the wealthy do not pay their fair share, yet no 
> one can say what that fair share is including you. I double-dog dare you 
> to put a percentage of income that a wealthy person should have to pay 
> for taxation in this country. While you're at it, tell me what 
> constitutes wealthy.

It should be whatever Bill Clinton says it should be.  He managed to bring 
our deficit into negative numbers.  Check this out:

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/faq.html

Look especially at the blue bar graph midway down the page which I have 
modified here to show who was president during which years:

http://taxa.epi.umn.edu/~mbmiller/national_debt.png

After WWII, the debt held steady at a just under $2 trillion until the 
great, great and wonderful amazing Ronald Wilson Reagan, our national 
hero, took office in 1/1981.  Then it doubled in 8 years.  He was really 
good, wasn't he -- he gave $2 trillion to his friends and we just loved 
him for it.  Of course, GHW Bush kept it going from 1/1989 to 1/1993. 
But then lying, blowjob-loving, horrible Bill Clinton took office and from 
1/1993 to 1/2001 the deficit spending got under control and we had a major 
economic boom time.  The bastard!  After Clinton, God's own GW Bush took 
office in 1/2001.  The amazing wonderful and perfect GW Bush was able to 
get the deficit back out of its negative slump and back into the hundreds 
of billions per annum range.  Now the rich were getting more money, 
finally -- it was about time!

Going back before Reagan we can see a little increase under Ford (he tried 
so hard) and then a decline in the debt under Carter, horribly depressing, 
malaise-ridden Carter.  Damned tax-and-spend liberal Democrats!

So my answer is:  Tax the rich according to whatever plan Bill Clinton and 
Al Gore were proposing just a few years ago.  I don't recall the numbers, 
but you can look them up.

Mike

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion