Obama tells Israel to f#ck off.....

Jasaoke · Post by **Jasaoke** » Friday May 20, 2011

As a Christian, I heartily support the Jewish people, not necessarily the nation of Israel.

If you look at the long list of people and nations who have been bent on destroying the Jews, it becomes clear that their continued existence on Earth is proof that they are, in fact, God's chosen people.

Hawk · Post by **Hawk** » Saturday May 21, 2011

f.sciarrillo wrote:By divine principles, christians have to support Israel. Am I wrong in that ?

I agree.

Hawk · Post by **Hawk** » Saturday May 21, 2011

I don't know all of the details of what Obama said, BUT every president has tried to help establish peace. To just say, "Go back to 1967 borders" might not work, but it might start a compromise. I believe the Palestinians must agree to never attack Israel (in any manor) again. This would force the Palestinians to police themselves.

I'm not saying it would work, but it might...

f.sciarrillo · Post by **f.sciarrillo** » Saturday May 21, 2011

From what I understand, going back to 1967 borders would cut Jerusalem in half. And wouldn't whatever is on the Palestinian side will be destroyed?

onegunguitar · Post by **onegunguitar** » Saturday May 21, 2011

I think Dave Mustaine had it figured out back in 1990:
Holy Wars.....

Brother will kill brother
Spilling blood across the land
Killing for religion
Something I don't understand

Fools like me, who cross the sea
And come to foreign lands
Ask the sheep, for their beliefs
Do you kill on God's command?

A country that's divided
Surely will not stand
My past erased, no more disgrace
No foolish naive stand

The end is near, it's crystal clear
Part of the master plan
Don't look now to Israel
It might be your homeland

Holy wars

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9d4ui9q7eDM

Great song

lonewolf · Post by **lonewolf** » Saturday May 21, 2011

I just figured out Obama's economic plan. After watching "Brewster's Millions," he believes that if he can spend $30 trillion in a month and have nothing to show for it, he will receive another $300 trillion at the end of the month.

onegunguitar · Post by **onegunguitar** » Saturday May 21, 2011

lonewolf wrote:I just figured out Obama's economic plan. After watching "Brewster's Millions," he believes that if he can spend $30 trillion in a month and have nothing to show for it, he will receive another $300 trillion at the end of the month.

Hawk · Post by **Hawk** » Saturday May 21, 2011

lonewolf wrote:I just figured out Obama's economic plan. After watching "Brewster's Millions," he believes that if he can spend $30 trillion in a month and have nothing to show for it, he will receive another $300 trillion at the end of the month.

That's

songsmith · Post by **songsmith** » Saturday May 21, 2011

Where exactly is the freedom in Israel? Isn't it a Jewish theocracy? Aren't non-Christian theocracies inherently evil, a la Muslim theocracies?
Also, wasn't the 1967 war simply US-sponsored imperialism, and what gave Isrsel the right to just invade and annex that land, which was NOT given to them in the creation of a Jewish state? And if your child throws a stone at me, does that give me the right to shoot him (happenes all the time in Isreal)?
As for the Arab Spring, the fact that none of you acknowledge it shows me a great deal. Watch a newscast from any other country than the US, and you'll see it's always the lead story (besides natural disasters recently)... why? Because it will have vast influence on the world at large. Huge populations are out from under the thumb of religious fanaticism and right-wing fascism. Why aren't they bastions of democracy yet? Duh, it took the U.S. YEARS to gel and define itself, this all started in FEBRUARY.
I have no use for Israel, over any other nation. Jews are free to move about the world as they see fit now. There's no more need for a Jewish homeland than there is a Scientologist homeland.
As for that deficit, the most costly part of our current debt is not TARP, or the Stimulus, or the Affordable Healthcare Act. It's the Bush Tax Cuts. Remember when the House held the middle class hostage in order to keep those tax cuts? And again, why isn't the right howling over US aid to Israel? Does God Himself need US taxpayer support?

Banned · Post by **Banned** » Saturday May 21, 2011

songsmith wrote:Where exactly is the freedom in Israel? Isn't it a Jewish theocracy? Aren't non-Christian theocracies inherently evil, a la Muslim theocracies?
Also, wasn't the 1967 war simply US-sponsored imperialism, and what gave Isrsel the right to just invade and annex that land, which was NOT given to them in the creation of a Jewish state? And if your child throws a stone at me, does that give me the right to shoot him (happenes all the time in Isreal)?
As for the Arab Spring, the fact that none of you acknowledge it shows me a great deal. Watch a newscast from any other country than the US, and you'll see it's always the lead story (besides natural disasters recently)... why? Because it will have vast influence on the world at large. Huge populations are out from under the thumb of religious fanaticism and right-wing fascism. Why aren't they bastions of democracy yet? Duh, it took the U.S. YEARS to gel and define itself, this all started in FEBRUARY.
I have no use for Israel, over any other nation. Jews are free to move about the world as they see fit now. There's no more need for a Jewish homeland than there is a Scientologist homeland.
As for that deficit, the most costly part of our current debt is not TARP, or the Stimulus, or the Affordable Healthcare Act. It's the Bush Tax Cuts. Remember when the House held the middle class hostage in order to keep those tax cuts? And again, why isn't the right howling over US aid to Israel? Does God Himself need US taxpayer support?

Rant much? Wrong always.

songsmith · Post by **songsmith** » Sunday May 22, 2011

Avoid the questions much?
Prove me wrong.

Banned · Post by **Banned** » Sunday May 22, 2011

Tax cuts are never the cause of a debt. It is lack of tax cuts that contribute to the debt. Tax cuts stimulate the economy, always have, always will.

People make economic decisions with their money. The government makes political decisions with our money that they confiscate at gunpoint. Which one do you think helps the economy, which one helps politicians?

Even if we taxed all the rich at 100% tax rates, it would only run this government for a few months.

Its runaway spending that causes debt.

Israel is no more a Jewish theocracy than we are a Christian theocracy.

Hawk · Post by **Hawk** » Sunday May 22, 2011

undercoverjoe wrote:Tax cuts are never the cause of a debt. It is lack of tax cuts that contribute to the debt. Tax cuts stimulate the economy, always have, always will.

People make economic decisions with their money. The government makes political decisions with our money that they confiscate at gunpoint. Which one do you think helps the economy, which one helps politicians?

Even if we taxed all the rich at 100% tax rates, it would only run this government for a few months.

Its runaway spending that causes debt.

Israel is no more a Jewish theocracy than we are a Christian theocracy.

Joe, if tax cuts are not a cause of debt, please explain how the debt increased greatly under Reagan GHW and GW ?

I'll remind you that the very first President to literally collect taxes at gun point WAS the very first president. A founding father no less...

If we had GWs stimulus money back (you did not accept that on moral grounds right ? because it was designated to go toward the debt) we would not have as great a debt. If we even had Regan era taxes we would be One Trillion dollars LESS in debt (tax cuts to increase debt). And if we had Reagan era taxes we would be climbing out of debt, or at least holding even.

Banned · Post by **Banned** » Sunday May 22, 2011

Hawk wrote:
Joe, if tax cuts are not a cause of debt, please explain how the debt increased greatly under Reagan GHW and GW ?

SPENDING!!!!!

Hawk · Post by **Hawk** » Sunday May 22, 2011

undercoverjoe wrote:
Hawk wrote:
Joe, if tax cuts are not a cause of debt, please explain how the debt increased greatly under Reagan GHW and GW ?

SPENDING!!!!!

To be more precise, taking in less than they spend. And then stupidly deciding that taking in even less (tax cuts) without cutting spending is a better idea.

Banned · Post by **Banned** » Sunday May 22, 2011

Its spending more than you have. You can't do that, I can't do that, yet our government does it all the time.

If you think it's a matter of not taxing, why not give the government all of your money, and they will give you back what they have left. That will really expand the economy.

f.sciarrillo · Post by **f.sciarrillo** » Monday May 23, 2011

There was a thing on CNN last week that said tax cuts worked during the reagan presidency, and the tax hikes worked during the Clinton presidency. So I guess it could go either way.

I still don't agree with paying 70% of my pay check to the government. The most I would go for is 39%. Anything over that is more than they need.

Hawk · Post by **Hawk** » Monday May 23, 2011

f.sciarrillo wrote:There was a thing on CNN last week that said tax cuts worked during the reagan presidency, and the tax hikes worked during the Clinton presidency. So I guess it could go either way.

I still don't agree with paying 70% of my pay check to the government. The most I would go for is 39%. Anything over that is more than they need.

Ha Ha Ha...Reagan cut taxes THEN raised taxes 12 times ! And he doubled the deficit ! And I would love to go back to Reagan era taxes as GW cut them after Reagan raised them.

The "godliness" of Reagan is a myth.

lonewolf · Post by **lonewolf** » Monday May 23, 2011

Hawk wrote:
f.sciarrillo wrote:There was a thing on CNN last week that said tax cuts worked during the reagan presidency, and the tax hikes worked during the Clinton presidency. So I guess it could go either way.

I still don't agree with paying 70% of my pay check to the government. The most I would go for is 39%. Anything over that is more than they need.
Ha Ha Ha...Reagan cut taxes THEN raised taxes 12 times ! And he doubled the deficit ! And I would love to go back to Reagan era taxes as GW cut them after Reagan raised them.

You just argued yourself out of the premise that tax cuts cause deficits.

PStl · Post by **PStl** » Monday May 23, 2011

Netanyahu 1
Obama 0

songsmith · Post by **songsmith** » Monday May 23, 2011

Lots of "math" here with green fur on it. It's obvious to anyone who listens to the rightwing media where it comes from.

"Tax cuts are never the cause of a debt. It is lack of tax cuts that contribute to the debt. Tax cuts stimulate the economy, always have, always will."

When? Name a time when tax cuts resulted in stimulus to the economy, without adding to govt debt? Reagan? Reagan nearly tripled the deficit, spending as much as all other presidents before him combined. The result? Executive salaries increased from 20 times the average worker's to 200 times his salary, and 1000 times the average isn't at all unheard of. Meanwhile, The bottom 90% of wage-earners' salaries has stagnated, barely keeping pace with inflation. Reaganomics invented the Yuppy, and the Yuppy went on to control Wall St. The current idea that tax breaks stimulate growth is utter nonsense. If your house burned down, could you build a new one faster if you took a cut in pay (tax revenues)? This is ordinary Double Santa Claus, GOP spending like madmen until the next guy comes in, then blame him and scream about the bill. It's happened with every Dem president since Carter, that I know of. Carter got the bills for Vietnam, and Reagan made it sound like we were on the brink. He had no idea, as usual.

"Even if we taxed all the rich at 100% tax rates, it would only run this government for a few months. "

So you're saying that the top 2%, who get paid 50% of the money... that half of the total pool is less than our half.

I think you need to look up the word, "half." And nobody's suggesting the Top 2% pay a hundred percent tax rate, that's a "slippery-slope" argument, which is logical fallacy. However, if they paid what the average person pays, that'd go a long way to paying down the debt.

"Its spending more than you have. You can't do that, I can't do that, yet our government does it all the time. "

We all do that all the time. I have a house that would take 30 years to pay off (well, mine won't take that long, but you get the idea). I have a 5-year note on a truck. I have a credit card. If somebody has a yearly income of $60K, a mortgage for $150,000, a vehicle that cost $20,000, and household costs of another 20 grand per year, which sounds pretty average, does that mean that person is headed for immediate financial collapse? (Okay, maybe it does, if a guy making 15 million a year wants to double the price of gasoline, but I digress

)

"If you think it's a matter of not taxing, why not give the government all of your money, and they will give you back what they have left. That will really expand the economy."

More slippery-slope argument. Like, "If it's okay for Big Oil to artificially inflate the price of gasoline for nothing more than profit's sake, why not just give all our money to Big Oil, and let them dispense whatever gasoline to each of us that they see fit." See my point?

As for Netanyahu "getting one over" on Obama, I don't see that at all. Obama's sticking to his guns, reiterating what he said to Netanyahu to a gathering of Israel's top supporters in the US. Start with the 1967 borders, then work it out amongst yourselves, without input from Hamas. Again, Israel could not exist without massive US aid, both financially and militarily. Any true deficit hawk should see it's not money well-spent. Israel's existence is most certainly NOT a calming factor in the Middle East, it's obviously the biggest issue riling the Arab world. Again, shooting children who throw stones is not "retaliatory." It's a war-crime.

Banned · Post by **Banned** » Monday May 23, 2011

Reagan's tax cuts increased revenue to the treasury. The problem was that the congress spent $2 for every $1 increase. Result was debt. Pretty simple.

In 94 under Clinton, capital gains taxes were lowered and revenue increased.

In the 60's JFK lowered taxes and revenues increased.

Johnny and Bill, you guys love taxes so much, why don't you pay mine?

Banned · Post by **Banned** » Monday May 23, 2011

Who ever said its OK for big oil to inflate prices? Please show where someone on RP posted that?

songsmith · Post by **songsmith** » Monday May 23, 2011

undercoverjoe wrote:Reagan's tax cuts increased revenue to the treasury. The problem was that the congress spent $2 for every $1 increase. Result was debt. Pretty simple.

In 94 under Clinton, capital gains taxes were lowered and revenue increased.

In the 60's JFK lowered taxes and revenues increased.

Johnny and Bill, you guys love taxes so much, why don't you pay mine?

In the Clinton and Kennedy cases, the economy was already doing pretty well when taxes were cut, in the case of Reagan and Bush, um, not so much. They had the sense to know that revenues would go up, simply because more goods and services were being sold, even before they reduced taxes. Reagan did not, and it led to the largest debt in US history at the time. In addition, Kennedy and Clinton both had the benefit of something the right NEVER acknowledges: Technology booms. Kennedy had the Space Age (which the gov't sponsored, btw). Clinton had the Internet Age (which the gov't started). In both cases, new technology resulted in more worker efficiency, which led to better bottom-lines for business, resulting in more revenue... NOT corporate tax cuts (which actually amount to a relatively small share of total corporate expenses), or personal tax cuts (which benefit the rich far more than the working-class and poor, whom you claim don't pay any taxes anyway).

songsmith · Post by **songsmith** » Monday May 23, 2011

undercoverjoe wrote:Who ever said its OK for big oil to inflate prices? Please show where someone on RP posted that?

Show me where you agreed that Big Oil inflates prices for it's own benefit. If you can, you'd have to agree that the "free market" doesn't exist, because it's being manipulated, and that price controls should be enacted. You'd also have to agree that Big Oil should give up it's $2Bn-per-year tax break, as they are taking that directly from American taxpayers. Can you agree?