Nothing but lip service, rich get richer, the cost of morale
 

Something stuck out in this Army Times editorial that is just fucking ludicrous. It shows EXACTLY where Republican politicians place their priorities. >:

Good going, morons. Infected with such purulent greed. Fuck you.

A tax break from 88k to 83k? Doesn't that mean they(the rich folk) get LESS money?

The proposal was to lessen the tax-cut and was shot down. Over course this happened because of evil sinister forces and couldn't possibly be because maybe someone had what they thought was a better idea.

This would have been a good thing. Less money for the rich, not more. Re-read it.

I don't know, that was either phrased really horribly, or I know nothing about taxes. Probably a little of both.

I probably phrased the title poorly. I meant that these Republicans are not willing to sacrifice a fraction of their tax break to provide a better standard of living for the people that they are sending out to get killed to fulfill their agendas.

It makes me fucking sick. >:

Oh, good point. Little cunt bastards. It's funny because that said what, 5,000 dollars would be lost? 5 thousand out of a million a year? That's barely even 500 dollars a month, it's like chump change. Stingy ass bastards.

zero signal=ranxer part deux?

IS, Seeing how military spending would assumingly have some relevance to you, I find it very generous on your part for you to defend the financial interests of the wealthy. May their spending trickle down upon you like a new baptism.

I was actually referring to his seemingly endless hatred of the Republicans.

My endless hatred of Republicans? More like it happens that most of the screwed up bullshit that is going on is being perpetrated by them. I have no love of politics in general, so that it is Republican or Democrat is irrelevant.

Maybe if you would do something other than closing your eyes and opening your mouth to whatever they care to shovel into your gaping maw, you might see a bit more clearly.

I've never noticed Zero Signal to be particularly anti-Republican. Certainly no more so than the majority of folks here.

a ranxer-ish statement if I have ever seen one.

up until now you have not posted in this forum much, so you obviously haven't seen that I am one of the more moderate Republicans here. I generally make statements only after carefully considering my own opinions and values.

I only made the ranxer comparison because I saw a few similarities between the two of you, it certainly wasn't anything for you to get pissy over.

Wah wah wah. If you are so worried about getting more money to our brave soliders in the military, why don't you bitch about all the pork-barrel spending that goes on. Like sex studies to see how women get off. Or money for the postal service to go on retreates to basically fuck off on the taxpayer's dime for a couple of weekends. Whine about that instead of whining about how people don't want to give up more of their money when so much other money is being wasted.

You act like to get rich you have to screw people over.

I do bitch about pork barrel spending. I think it is ludicrous; we would not need most of the taxes that the government levies against its people if they did not squander it.

The people that do not want to give up any money include the very same people that are wasting it in the first place; or is that concept just completely alien to you?

Yes, Vinth, because that is exactly what I said. :rolleyes You have serious issues regarding creating fallacies out of your own deluded mind and then spreading them like they were gospel.

Okay, not that I doubt your statements about ye olde pork barrell, Vinth, but just to keep you on your toes, how about you post proof of the study on women 'getting off' and postal worker retreats?

Here's wy I bitch about spending on militray salleries, and verterans benefits. This administration waves and questions the patriotism of anyone who doesn't roll over for them. My personal feeling is they feeling is their patriotism starts at killing people and ends there too. I don't think they give a shit about the 'brave men and women' who fight the battles, and why would they? Most of them found ways oout of military service and are far too wealthy to worry about the VA taking care of them.

Max, do not forget about all of the Congress members with sons and daughters of age to enlist. Only a SINGLE senator had a son in the military. These fucks are happy to send your child over to some country to die for their agendas, but God forbid that their OWN should do the same thing.

It really shows exactly were their priorities lie in what they believe to be worth the blood. They see the armed forces as cannon fodder and simply tools as a means to an end, and not as human beings that may have families of their own. If they cared at ALL about them, then they would not send them out at the drop of a hat.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=32044

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,91850,00.html

I agree that the money is being wasted, except possibly for...
Rebuilding Iraq is bad?

Preventing STDs is clearly a waste of money. I mean what kind of government would want to do that? What makes STD prevention less worthy of funding than any other disease previntion?

And clearly study how organisms survive in extreme enviroments could be of no use. :rolleyes

You want to know a waste of money? How about $80 billion dollars for an unnessicary war.

Hmmmmm.....

War against someone who wants us to die and would use weapons against us or sell them the first chance he got

OR

Studying bacteria on the govt tip when a private company would have done it anyway.

Pull your chair away from the big boys' table. If you would have utter that statement anywhere in real life, you would have been laughed at and ridiculed all the way to your room. Well, if you would have uttered it in Seattle or San Francisco, maybe not, but everywhere else you would have.

Vinth: First, let me congratulate you on for ONCE sourcing something.

It was by far the most effort I've seen you put into anything.

They're both secondary sources and in neither case do they reference the alleged primary source, but still, I applaud your effort and I want to encourage it.

The first article is reporting by stenography, a story about a press release. The claims in it may well be true and certainly have basis in fact but the article you site doesn't make the effort to tie the charges to speciffic legislation, nor does it do any fact checking. It neither questions or corroborates the claims, merely copies them.

The second is a friggin' transcript of a Bill Oreilly rant.

But I'm glad you acatually bestirred yourself, and I concede you this point. Government wastes money.