Attention: Conservative Obsessive Captains

[Papps]

If by "everything" you mean this 1st, only and singular event, then I guess you got me red handed. Feel free to search and prove me wrong.

If you had allowed my text to permeate your subcutaneous layer, rather then fire off an impotent challenge for me to find the fallacies in the rant, you would know that I refused to do so (provide examples). I don't attempt to convert imbeciles, I simply relish "tweaking" their false conclusions.

Well one post was about how GWB is like Batman, the next one was about how you just saw the new Batman movie and thought is was symbolic of something. Then I started glazing over your posts after that.

I apologize to you and batman if I offended you two and your forbidden love.

 

[Tweaker]

Yes, thanks for the recap, you mouthbreathing cat rancher. This would be the singular event. My personal take on the Batman movie/Bush comparison, before and after I saw it.

Go mainline some metamucil and tell those infernal pill popping kids to GET OFF YOUR LAWN!

By the by, what self-respecting liberal would also be a homophobe? DOH! Liberals don't respect anyone, even themselves.

 

[Occam's Razor]

Aflac!

 

[Tweaker]

Smoke crack

 

[Papps]

Yes, thanks for the recap, you mouthbreathing cat rancher. This would be the singular event. My personal take on the Batman movie/Bush comparison, before and after I saw it.

Go mainline some metamucil and tell those infernal pill popping kids to GET OFF YOUR LAWN!

By the by, what self-respecting liberal would also be a homophobe? DOH! Liberals don't respect anyone, even themselves.

Last edited by Tweaker : Today at 14:33.

Did you edit out some sort of Batman reference.

 

[PCL_128]

Um, I'm pretty sure that Chris Nolan, the film's director, is a DNC contributor.

 

[Victor120]

at least we know who the conservative obsessive captains are now. booyakasha.

 

[Ifly4money]

One of the biggest problems in this country is our government is full of politicians. Some are Dem's some are Repub's some are liberal some are not. Some are smart so are outright stupid irresponsible people, but they are all (ok, maybe 1 or 2 are not) politicians.

I once heard a great definition of what a politician is.

Politician - noun- Someone who continually works towards being re-elected.

Which is the opposite of a "Statesman".

Statesman -noun- A person elected to public office that does the will of the people and serves in there best interest.

We must all stop re-electing the politicians we love to complain about.

Can we get a few statesmen to run for public office? Why is it most of the politicians have never-EVER had a real job? Elected officials were supposed to be accomplished business men(women) that would go serve a short time then GO THE HECK HOME and resume there business. Now we have "career politicians" that continually suck the life-blood from us all.

 

[rtwo]

Yeah kind of like how supplements are unregulated. When independent labs test them, many of them don't have any of the active ingredient that they claim to. "Snake oil" if you will.

Government regulation also ensures that when you eat a hamburger, there is a really good chance that it doesn't contain human fingers and mouse parts like it did prior to the Pure Food and Drug act.

Leaving private businesses to act ethically contrary to their economic interests doesn't work.

Pound for pound, 100% pure beef is cheaper to produce than human fingers or mouse parts. No self interested capitalist would attempt to sell human fingers or mouse parts as hamburger for at least two reasons:

1) Human finger/mouse burger is more costly to produce than 100% beef burger.

2) There is greater demand for the beef burger. Customer satisfaction is higher. Customer satisfaction is an important part of being in business (seems obvious, but I'm not sure all airline employees and unions are aware of that fact).

If independant labs are testing supplements isn't that more effective than new regulation? What are supplements anyway, modern day 'snake oil'? If there is a demand for 'snake oil' I say produce it and sell it.

The consumer has to take some responsibilty. Like you said Gov't regulation ensures a chance of getting the intended result. I believe you are ensured a chance (in other words you can be certain that anything might be possible) with or without gov't regulation.

 

[waveflyer]

How do people know when there is the occasional mouse in the meat?

Are you arguing that what they don't know won't hurt them?

If not- then you are arguing for oversight... which is the point of gov't.... and it's an age old problem this "who watches the watchers?" arguement you're about to make....

I think you are very spoiled by the order that a correct gov't does provide.

 

[dustrpilot]

Did you fail math?

He joined the U.S. Senate on Jan 4, 2005. Slightly more than 140 days ago. He joined the senate in Illinois in 1997. Do you really think being a lifetime politician is the best credentials one can have for the job?[/quote/]

Did you think I forgot about you, boy?
"From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United State Senator, to the time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he logged 143 days of experience in the Senate. That's how many days the Senate was actually in session and working. After 143 days of work experience, Obama believed he was ready to be Commander In Chief, Leader of the Free World, and fill the shoes of Abraham Lincoln, FDR, JFK and Ronald Reagan. 143 days.

I keep leftovers in my refrigerator longer than that."

Cindy McCain

Research it yourself,

 

[waveflyer]

wow
you mean the mccain camp is going after barack's experience?
No kidding?
just don't think anyone believes that argument is anything but politics.... when 'w' ran against gore, the argument was all about how bush's washington INexperience was a positive. Remember his total gov't experience was 6 years of governor of texas- before that- he lost a house election in '78.

You're only valid argument about inexperience would be to turn your back on bush and say that obama would run the country in just as f-d up a way as bush.

to me- you either have a talent for politics or you don't. Obama is for the middle class- Cindy Mccain is definitely not.

 

[pkober]

wow
you mean the mccain camp is going after barack's experience?
No kidding?
just don't think anyone believes that argument is anything but politics.... when 'w' ran against gore, the argument was all about how bush's washington INexperience was a positive. Remember his total gov't experience was 6 years of governor of texas- before that- he lost a house election in '78.

You're only valid argument about inexperience would be to turn your back on bush and say that obama would run the country in just as f-d up a way as bush.

to me- you either have a talent for politics or you don't. Obama is for the middle class- Cindy Mccain is definitely not.

You cannot compare governors to senators. Governors make real decisions and exercise power. Senators do not, they are debaters at best. They may exercise power within a committee but that is nowhere near the power a governor has. Before you start, that includes McCain. It's sad that we are down to two senators.

Obama, a multi millionaire elitist but yet somehow for the middle class. Yeah, he's just like me and you. A real down to earth dude. I'll take a hit of what you're smoking.

 

[Hair-on-Fire]

Did you fail math?

He joined the U.S. Senate on Jan 4, 2005. Slightly more than 140 days ago. He joined the senate in Illinois in 1997. Do you really think being a lifetime politician is the best credentials one can have for the job?[/quote/]

Did you think I forgot about you, boy?
"From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United State Senator, to the time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he logged 143 days of experience in the Senate. That's how many days the Senate was actually in session and working. After 143 days of work experience, Obama believed he was ready to be Commander In Chief, Leader of the Free World, and fill the shoes of Abraham Lincoln, FDR, JFK and Ronald Reagan. 143 days.

I keep leftovers in my refrigerator longer than that."

Cindy McCain

Research it yourself,

You still don't have a point.

I suppose when people ask how many years you've been flying you only add up the days you actually flew?

 

[Bob_Sacamano]

I thought that was to get down flight attendants' pants.

Dude,

Self medicate. Thats what alcohol is for.

 

[MJ42]

You still don't have a point. Yes he does, see below...

I suppose when people ask how many years you've been flying you only add up the days you actually flew? Experience equates to hours flying, not years you've had a certificate.

How about a 1500 hour ATP that has had a pilot certificate for 15 years? Does he have 15 years of experience or minimum ATP requirements with lots to learn?

John Edwards love child for President 2041!:smashonly if he's GOP).

 

[waveflyer]

pkober- if it weren't for the drug tests, man- we could light up all day on whatever propoganda steals into your head.
ok, on the first part-- governor is more applicable experience IMO- but we have had great presidents coming from congressional ranks, so i don't know if either of our opinions prove out. And like you said, it's not relevant in the current choice.

Elitist?-- jesus- do you guys live in a world where you only parrot talk radio?
He only paid off his student loans in 2005 w/ 'the audacity of hope'.
Listening to propoganda is NOT doing your part to educate yourself. Aren't you a military guy? You don't understand when propoganda is being used on you? It's an amazing case study-- these guys steal millions from you- are the real "ceo elitists" and you will blindly follow them- amazing
do you lube yourself up too? wouldn't want the neo-cons to get too dirty screwing us...

 

[dustrpilot]

Well just for the record, I don't like either one of them. We have an old elitist multi millionaire or a young elitist multi millionaire thats going to be president and I don't have any delusion that either one of them, or either party has our best interest at heart. Neither one of the candidates are leaders, they just represent special interest groups and grovel for money. Vote how you want, I really don't think it's gonna matter. Our country is F'd either way. I said earlier "Lord help us all" and I still mean it.

 

[Tweaker]

Here here! Harumph Harumph. I second that, Dusty!

 

[CA1900]

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/2127/wharrgarbldq9.jpg

 

[rtwo]

exactly.
there must be some order so that capitalism can prevail. government exists to slow and attempt to stop corruption-the only true enemy of capitalism. when you argue for no government- you argue for lawlessness

Rtwo- i'll do some research and get you those answers.

In the meantime-- i've been hearing the right-wing propoganda saying how obama will raise taxes on us (I think a lot of us are still living in the past.) According to the july 26th issue of the economist- taxes will remain w/in .7% in relation to gdp regardless of which candidate- 18.3% of gdp for Obama and 17.6% for mccain- post wwII average is 18% - the major difference is that the top 5th of wage earners (GUYS- THAT'S NOT US ANY LONGER) >$250,000 will see tax cuts under mccain- and be raised from 35%-39.5% under obama- while both propose cuts for the 98% of households earning under $250k Obama's cuts for middle class earners FAR exceed mccain for all class groups in the bottom 4/5's of wage earners. while mccain's largest tax breaks are for those in the top fifth of earners.

I CAN ONLY HOPE WE GET CONTRACTS WHERE WE CAN COMPLAIN ABOUT THE TAX RATES UNDER OBAMA.

BUT IF YOU VOTE MCCAIN- YOU WILL NOT HAVE THAT KIND OF LEVERAGE.

If you want argue spending-- you'll have to look at our current president before i can be scared of obama.

How is your research coming? Here are a couple of vocabulary words if you care to research them:

1) Passive income

2) Anarchy

May I make a couple of points:

Wealth refers more to Net worth than to Salary.

You can become weathy on just about any salary. However, gov't confiscation of any of your salary for whatever good or bad reasons, increases the time it will take to become wealthy.

If you are paid a salary chances are you are not wealthy (unless maybe you are paying your own salary).

A $250k/year salary is not wealthy nor should it be a reason to single someone out for financial punishment. It may sign that someone is more productive than average.

Now a few more questions for your research:

Under Obama what percent of a workers first $10,000 of annual income will be paid in SS/medicare (FICA) tax? How much under McCain?

What percent of a workers first $100,000 of salary/wage goes to FICA?

Is FICA confiscated on a workers production over $100,000/year?

Is FICA confiscated on an investors passive income?

Is there any corruption in gov't or is the private sector the sole repository of corruption?

 

[McNugget]

I thought that was to get down flight attendants' pants.

I think what Bob meant to say was: "up flight attendants' skirts".

 

[Papps]

Wealth refers more to Net worth than to Salary.

You can become weathy on just about any salary. However, gov't confiscation of any of your salary for whatever good or bad reasons, increases the time it will take to become wealthy.

If you are paid a salary chances are you are not wealthy (unless maybe you are paying your own salary).

A $250k/year salary is not wealthy nor should it be a reason to single someone out for financial punishment. It may sign that someone is more productive than average.

Someone has been shopping in the self-help/finance section at barnes and nobel. Is that "Rich dad, Poor dad" or a random snippet from Tony Robbins.

 

[rtwo]

How do people know when there is the occasional mouse in the meat?

Why would would someone put mouse in hamburger? Has the mouse been skined and guted so its presence is not easily detected? (A fairly labor intensive task for the devious corporations to perform just to trick unsuspecting costumers into eating mouse and for what reason?) Again help me understand your fear of mouse in your burger. What is the evil corporate motivation?

Are you arguing that what they don't know won't hurt them?

No, thats not my argument but since you brought it up can you counter you own hypethetical?

If not- then you are arguing for oversight... which is the point of gov't.... and it's an age old problem this "who watches the watchers?" arguement you're about to make....

Is that the point of gov't? What about smart people like PCL_128 who say they don't need regulation/oversight? He does think it is needed for others though.

Who is watching the watchers anyway? And the watchers of the watcher watchers? How 'bout a little more watching after ourselves.




I think you are very spoiled by the order that a correct gov't does provide.

I am spoiled by the Greatness of America. Greatness that I attribute not to regulation but freedom. Freedom for which we owe a debt of gratitude that we can never hope to repay.

 

[Dan Roman]

Someone has been shopping in the self-help/finance section at barnes and nobel. Is that "Rich dad, Poor dad" or a random snippet from Tony Robbins.

ROTFLMAO! That was good, you nailed it. The fact is their is a huge amount of wealth being shifted from the previously middle class and into the hands of a much smaller group of people in the U.S. The people who control the companies are getting greedier and greedier. United is a typical example. They raped the workers and than passed out 100's of millions of dollars to a small percentage of management and to stockholders.
You folks that think they shouldn't be taxed on those windfalls (They didn't "earn" it, they stole it) are wrong. Something has to be done to slow the huge income gap in this country between the have's and have nots or we will collapse into anarchy.

 

[Papps]

I am spoiled by the Greatness of America. Greatness that I attribute not to regulation but freedom. Freedom for which we owe a debt of gratitude that we can never hope to repay.

Government oversight is what is known as a system of "checks and balances" its helps people do the right thing when its more economical to do the wrong thing.

Its not perfect, like any other complex system, it breaks down and needs maintenance.

I realize that the "far right" has problems understanding what checks and balances are for, and why we would use them.

 

[Dan Roman]

Or "new rich", where on a $ 18,000 F/O salary ,you buy that 92' lexus and rack up credit card and daddy debt to buy plasma screens and expensive clothes, then talk to everyone within ear shot about how worried you are about a tax hike affecting your income from ".........." (insert the name of whatever major airline name that your regional flies for.)

Then have the nads to spout off about personal responsibility and right wing values.

You're right, I know a guy who came from a wealthy family and had everything handed to him on a silver platter. He is a big fan of Rush Limbaugh, right wing values and "personal responsibilty". He is very disdainful of those not as fortunate as he and basicly doesn't have a clue. Seems like a common right wing trait.

 

[sat74]

Huckabee and Ron Paul, among others, knew the truth. Its time for everyone to wake up!

Cracking the Code

 

[Papps]

You're right, I know a guy who came from a wealthy family and had everything handed to him on a silver platter. He is a big fan of Rush Limbaugh, right wing values and "personal responsibilty". He is very disdainful of those not as fortunate as he and basicly doesn't have a clue. Seems like a common right wing trait.

lol Yeah personal responsibility seems to exclude "daddy money".

 

[FLYLOW22]

Hey uh... get the gear, would ya?