to me it just seems morally wrong to force someone else to give me their money just because they're rich and better at making money than i am. you can justify it by accusing them all of being thieving greedy bastards, but if i take their money, i'm just a greedy thieving bastard. kind of the same reason i'm against the death penalty.
Its about taking care of eachother, and our country. It isn't like the rich are going to go without just so the poor in our country can go with. It just makes more sense to cut the taxes of those who need money the most, not those who need it the least.
I'm still waiting on this one after two weeks. After all it was 'BREAKING NEWS' from the very credible and highly esteemed news source *insert laugh here* the World Tribune. According to what I read back then - these people were hot on the trail of WMD. The funny thing is the link you posted to the story concerning the WMD doesn't lead to the same article anymore. Finding WMD would be something I think everyone would want to know about. Don't you agree? I mean that was one of the main reasons why this administration wanted to got to war to begin with right? Yet, for some odd reason this news source didn't archive the URL... hmmmm......
You are one incredibly stupid individual... here you go have another: http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13282 It's not like an article like this is only from one source. These things were all over the internet a month or two ago.
How am I stupid? I said the link that you innitially posted in this thread didn't lead to the article and it doesn't. These things were all over the news a month ago? Have I been in a coma for the last two months? Were WMD found and I somehow didn't hear about it? WMD is a pretty big deal. I'm sorry, WMD was one of the two major reasons why Bush wanted to go to the war. WMD in Iraq til this day remains false. As does the danger proposed by this other liar I assume you support. http://www.moveon.org/censure/caughtonvideo/ go ahead, check out your boy Donny.
I dont know if you realize this, but news sights change articles, monthly, weekly, and sometimes even daily. Was you're failure to realize this why I called you stupid? No. Now allow me to clarify some things you dont seem to understand. Did we find WMD's? No. We tracked some, that are in all likelyhood Saddam's. Will we ever hold these WMD's in our hands? Doubt it. In order to get them we would have to carry our army into even more countries. Not only that, we are no longer in danger of Saddam useing them. Did Iraq pose an imminent threat to America? I don't know. And I don't think we ever will know. But do I need to remind you that the bush administration is the the only group of politicians that saw Iraq as a threat? Oh yes, many others believed Iraq to be a threat to society everywhere, including Hilliry Clinton and John Kerry.
Hmmm, like I said WMD are a pretty big deal. Such a big deal that if we were tracking them, I seriously doubt we would lose track of them. Condi and Powell had been interviewed during the early stages of the Bush administration and both of them stated that Iraq did not have them. I'm sorry, as evil as Saddam and his regime was, under the watch dog eye of the US and the UN, Iraq was never going to pose a possible threat in terms of conventional warfare to US soil. If you want to talk about being a threat in terms of harboring terrorists, ok, decent arguement, but the same thing could be said for Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, to an extent Pakistan - many, many countries. So what are we to do? Attack and occupy all of these nations and overthrow all of their governments? The only way to fight the war on terror is through the use of intelligence - conventional warfare is not the answer.
Noone ever said that we lost track of the WMD's. And to say that Iraq never posed a threat is just wrong. Because we just don't know. But on the flip side, it is also wrong to say that it was a threat.
It makes sense to cut taxes for the people who pay the most, But I think everyone should get a huge tax cut, not just ones who "need it" or "don't need it".
Exactly, that's why he said, "which isn't very" at the end of his post, generally meaning that there aren't really any unbiased news stations. And if there are, they are few and hard to come by.
I disagree...you look at it like the poorer people would be taking the rich people's money if they had to pay more taxes, but that just isn't the case. Our taxes that we pay don't go right back into our pocket. They go into government spending. No one would be taking money from anyone that worked harder than them.
Yes...they would be. Okay, so it's the government who is doing the stealing, and the government spends money on programs for certain people. If I steal a car, and give it to you, and you know I stole it but did not care, that doesn't make you guilty?
