Angry, disgruntled, furious conservatives -- See me :).

[novascotiadiesel]

the idea i am conveying is that the general philosophy of helping those less fortunate than ourselves is to be a basic tennant of "goodness" a proportional taxation system, intelligently applied, is an extension of that and not something to be related to thievery, opression, keeping people down and not being willing to share your good fortune is not a good way, if you lived somewhere cold and had fire wood, and someone was freezing would let thm warm themselves at yoru fire, rember this poor fu**er wasn't given an axe at birth and shown how to use it, me I don't let that guy freeeze, that is my point, nothing more, now I have to get ready to head out to earn!!!! and I am happy to pay my share of taxes to be redistributed!!!!

Hail

[Art]

As someone who works in political media, this **** is pretty hilarious. Good luck. That’s not to say you should not do it, go for it, just that a lot of people just don’t understand what it takes to have the kind of effect you are talking about.

I believe I said the impact would be small and insignificant .

As for the ad running, I believe YouTube is free.

[USS Redskins]

I always love people who put their money where their mouth is. For example, Spreading the wealth guys - you would expect them to be really generous people - very giving and wanting to spread their own wealth around.

Mr. President Elect gave less than 1% of his salary (around $2000) to charity before 2005 each year and his VP elect gave a whole $4000 over a 10 year period. By Obama's own definition of wealth, both he and Biden are wealthy.

Seems they are only generous when it comes to spreading other peoples money around.

Hell, I dont make squat and I give over 2%.

[Art]

So would you cut the Stafford/Perkins federal loan programs? Medicare for retired seniors? Social security?

And what about the military? Shouldn't that go into the category of government programs to which people don't see a direct benefit and is therefore "stealing"?

The federal government should not even have a Department of Education, as it did not until the last generation or so.

The military is specifically enumerated in the Constitution as a requirement of the Federal Government, and, provides for the general walfare of the people, which it is required to do.

[Vicious]

The disintegration of the educational system would lead to the end of the American Hegemony. If that's your goal that's quite frightening.

[Art]

If we do go with a flat tax. What deducations would be allowed?

With a flat tax no deductions should be allowed, but, those in charge, if they ever utilized a flat tax, would screw it up by having deductions.

The U.S. Tax Code, literally, should be about six words. Deductions are a form of social engineering. Have children, credit. Buy a house, credit. Green car, credit. Marry, credit.

Credit none of it. Pay 15 percent of your income.

Again, I don't believe in income taxes on the federal level at all, but a flat tax would be better than what we have.

[Dictator]

crap on a cracker...I agree with Art.

[luckydevil]

I always love people who put their money where their mouth is. For example, Spreading the wealth guys - you would expect them to be really generous people - very giving and wanting to spread their own wealth around.

Mr. President Elect gave less than 1% of his salary (around $2000) to charity before 2005 each year and his VP elect gave a whole $4000 over a 10 year period. By Obama's own definition of wealth, both he and Biden are wealthy.

Seems they are only generous when it comes to spreading other peoples money around.

Hell, I dont make squat and I give over 2%.

I always love how people pretend there is a difference between the two parties when it comes to spreading the wealth around. But hey, I guess it is not spreading the wealth around when rich people or military contractors get welfare

[Art]

the idea i am conveying is that the general philosophy of helping those less fortunate than ourselves is to be a basic tennant of "goodness" a proportional taxation system, intelligently applied, is an extension of that and not something to be related to thievery, opression, keeping people down and not being willing to share your good fortune is not a good way, if you lived somewhere cold and had fire wood, and someone was freezing would let thm warm themselves at yoru fire, rember this poor fu**er wasn't given an axe at birth and shown how to use it, me I don't let that guy freeeze, that is my point, nothing more, now I have to get ready to head out to earn!!!! and I am happy to pay my share of taxes to be redistributed!!!!

Hail

The idea you are conveying is one of forced charity. Goodness isn't compulsed giving required of another to those less fortunate. It is requiring of yourself to help those less fortunate.

You can pay as much as you wish to the federal government if you wish it. You should. Cut a check a week to the IRS with a note to use it as they wish. That's perfectly legal and valid if the federal government is the charity you feel does the best work with your money.

Once you reach into the pocket of another person and take YOUR happiness to pay YOUR share to your need to make another pay whatever share you feel he owes, is when you've crossed the line from goodness to envy.

[Vicious]

I don't think you really understand what you're asking for. This isn't really a matter of goodness, this is a matter of having a stable and successful society. If you don't have that, the numbers in your bank account mean absolutely nothing.

[maxiumone]

You'll forgive me if I don't sympathize with you making over 250k. My god our country are full of greedy *******s. Really and truly. They don't give a **** about who they step on to get ahead as long as they get ahead. Art, I highly doubt a 4% increase is going to kill you. What? You aren't going to be able to afford that 4th 50" LCD TV to put in the bathroom now? Boo ****ing hoo.

Cry about something important will you.

And you will forgive me if I don't want to give MY hard earned money that I worked 60 hours a week to earn to some fat lazy ass who sits on a couch all day waiting for there next handout.

And forgive me if I dont want to hand over another 4% of my money to the family that has run up their credit cards to tens of thousands of dollars just so they could keep up with the Jones. Or the ones who bought houses well above there means.

What all people have to realize is there are consequence to their actions

What you fail to understand is that it is MY money to do what I like with and by me buying more of the 50 LCD's for my pisser keeps more people employed.

[Vicious]

The implication that if you make less then 250k a year you are a fat lazy ass is ridiculous, shut your mouth.

[helptheSKINS]

the idea i am conveying is that the general philosophy of helping those less fortunate than ourselves is to be a basic tennant of "goodness" a proportional taxation system, intelligently applied, is an extension of that and not something to be related to thievery, opression, keeping people down and not being willing to share your good fortune is not a good way, if you lived somewhere cold and had fire wood, and someone was freezing would let thm warm themselves at yoru fire, rember this poor fu**er wasn't given an axe at birth and shown how to use it, me I don't let that guy freeeze, that is my point, nothing more, now I have to get ready to head out to earn!!!! and I am happy to pay my share of taxes to be redistributed!!!!

Hail

I haven't heard anyone who's rich saying they don't want to pay their fair share. The point is that isn't happening. While you don't mind having Obama take your money and distribute it to people who didn't earn it, I do.

What happened to my list of social programs the govt runs well. I'm 0-10 on getting that list from our resident lefties. Social programs Obama wants to create more of. A simple list might make me feel better about how my money is being spent. Since so many here want the govt to control more of your lives, you shouldn't have a problem proving it's better at spending your money then you are.

[Art]

The disintegration of the educational system would lead to the end of the American Hegemony. If that's your goal that's quite frightening.

As the educational system has deterioriated SINCE the federal government integrated itself into it, your view of the goal is a poor one. I'm reasonably certain you can provide no evidence of improvement in our educational system since the formation of the Department of Education under Carter, if I recall correctly.

[Art]

I don't think you really understand what you're asking for. This isn't really a matter of goodness, this is a matter of having a stable and successful society. If you don't have that, the numbers in your bank account mean absolutely nothing.

And a nation does not remain strong by weakening the strong.

Critically, we do not have a strong society. We have an indebted society with several major "obligations" that could well cripple society if not funded and they can not be funded without essentially surrendering the core ideals that founded the nation in the first place.

[Vicious]

As the educational system has deterioriated SINCE the federal government integrated itself into it, your view of the goal is a poor one. I'm reasonably certain you can provide no evidence of improvement in our educational system since the formation of the Department of Education under Carter, if I recall correctly.

The first American public school was authorized on January 2, 1643 by the Town of Dedham in the Massachusetts Bay Colony — nearly 150 years before the establishment of the United States. - link from wikipedia.

Federal or State, you are investing for the future of America. They knew that before they even made America.

[DCSaints_fan]

The federal government should not even have a Department of Education, as it did not until the last generation or so.

The military is specifically enumerated in the Constitution as a requirement of the Federal Government, and, provides for the general walfare of the people, which it is required to do.

It doesn't say it say its a requirement, even if it was the military certainly doesn't have to be as big as it is now. Shortly after the revolution the US didn't have much of a national army. And it also says "defense". Its very debatable that our military adventures for the past 50 years have been about defense.

[Vicious]

And a nation does not remain strong by weakening the strong.

Critically, we do not have a strong society. We have an indebted society with several major "obligations" that could well cripple society if not funded and they can not be funded without essentially surrendering the core ideals that founded the nation in the first place.

You are not strong, you have money, you are not strong.

Our "Obligations" as you put it are what is crippling our society? It was not the mishandling of housing loans and the endless lines of credit that the "wealthy" dispensed in massive amounts as soon as they were deregulated? What are the "core" ideals that founded the nation? Are they present in the federalist papers?

[Art]

The implication that if you make less then 250k a year you are a fat lazy ass is ridiculous, shut your mouth.

I'm reminded of the flak Oprah took when giving so much money to South Africa to fund her school and fight poverty. She was taken to task by those here who felt she should do more to fight poverty in her own city of Chicago. And Oprah said when she grew up there was poverty. No running water. No electricity. Sharing clothes to school. She said poverty in America is entirely different now, better by her implication.

Whether the average "poor" household has cable or two pairs of Air Jordans and one XBox or not does not mean there are not legitimately poor individuals in the country. But, poverty is no longer told by the grandfather who walked uphill both ways to school in snow storms with holes in their pants.

[Art]

The first American public school was authorized on January 2, 1643 by the Town of Dedham in the Massachusetts Bay Colony — nearly 150 years before the establishment of the United States. - link from wikipedia.

Federal or State, you are investing for the future of America. They knew that before they even made America.

I have spoken exclusively about the federal government and the role of the federal government. States need to educate their children and communities need to decide what level of funding to provide for it. Understanding the distinction between the role of states and the federal government would be key to understanding the views I have on this. That the federal government has no charge to do much of what it does does not negate the fact a government entity far more local may have that charge.

[Vicious]

So everyone that makes 250k or less is on welfare? You're not making much sense.

We're going back to the Bill Clinton system. The bush tax cuts will lapse, you will pay what you used to, the middle class will get their tax cuts and will be able to afford health care and education. There are countries where Both of those things including higher education are government controlled and they have rich people in them too. You managed to get money in your life, congratulations. There are more important things than you or I being rich and that is the stability and success of America. That will be put above me and you every single time.

[Vicious]

I have spoken exclusively about the federal government and the role of the federal government. States need to educate their children and communities need to decide what level of funding to provide for it. Understanding the distinction between the role of states and the federal government would be key to understanding the views I have on this. That the federal government has no charge to do much of what it does does not negate the fact a government entity far more local may have that charge.

We fought a civil war over this. The feds won.

[Titaw]

I am with you Art. You and I feel the same way and I only make $80K/year. There are a majority of issues that i would like to discuss with you. I really think that if we start now a young charismatic indivdual may have a shot at true change. Some of the issues include.

Abortion - 3 ways to get one: Rape, Incest and Dire Health Concerns for the Mother or the Child. There are other forms of contraceptives USE THEM!!!

Taxation - fairtax.org

Gay Marriage - Don't call it marriage, you can call it a union or a partnership, but the principles of marriage were founded by religion. Define marriage as between a man and a woman, but allow homosexuals to obtain equal benefits as a union or partnership.

Education - Needs to improve by paying teachers more and supplying the schools with everything that is necessary.

Military - It should be mandatory that ever person capable of serving does for at least two years. No loopholes, EVERYONE!

Social Security - Privatize and make it a retirement supplement it was NEVER intended to be a full retirement account.

The focus should be on the American family and community. Today, many kids are raised by day care providers not by their parents. This is because both parents NEED to work to pay the bills. When the women's rights movement was successful the influx of new earners forced the economy to inflate to raise the status quo. Well now, it is almost unheard of for a parent to stay at home with the kids, because it is nearly impossible. A grant should be given to a stay at home parent. I do not view this as a "reward for the lazy" because a stay at home parent does work, raising their children.

[Art]

It doesn't say it say its a requirement, even if it was the military certainly doesn't have to be as big as it is now. Shortly after the revolution the US didn't have much of a national army. And it also says "defense". Its very debatable that our military adventures for the past 50 years have been about defense.

Section 8. The Congress shall have the power to raise armies and provide and support a Navy and governing the portion that is employed by the United States. The Constitution, as a document, is reasonably wonderful as it expressly lays out what it wants the federal government to provide, and reserves that which is not called for to the states.

Unfortunately they added to the people for that last part, which is what hurts.

[SkinsHokieFan]

And a nation does not remain strong by weakening the strong.

Critically, we do not have a strong society. We have an indebted society with several major "obligations" that could well cripple society if not funded and they can not be funded without essentially surrendering the core ideals that founded the nation in the first place.

Exactly. An indebted society that sucks off Washington DC

Too many people have a role in this.

The entitlement bomb will blow up in our faces