Well I just found out that The Supreme Court has decided Obama Care is constitutional and within Congress's Power to Tax.  How do you all feel about this?

It's fun to watch the rethugnicans have a shit fit.  As my cousin joked on facebook, the Fox story will be "Obama care constitutional, death panels established, Russian tanks roll into Alaska, Palin bravely shoots at them from helicopter."

How do you all feel about this?

November 6 will determine the fate of the dictatorial assholes in the White House and Congress who are "governing" against the will of the people. Over 2/3 of the USA population are opposed to it. It was passed by steath on Christmas Eve without anyone having actually read the POS. Pelousy had the brass to say that they had to pass it to find out what is in it.

A shake-up of world-class proportion is coming. Let the revolution begin.

Who knows where you get the "2/3" figure?  Would you like to blame the Chief Justice?  Fire away.

The court upheld it on the premise that it is a tax. The Kenyan-Liar-In-Chief specifically stated in 2009 that it was NOT a tax.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Under this mandate, the government is forcing people to spend money, fining you if you don't. How is that not a tax?

OBAMA: Well, hold on a second, George. Here..here's what's happening. You and I are both paying $900, on averageour familiesin higher premiums because of uncompensated care. Now what I've said is that if you can't afford health insurance, you certainly shouldn't be punished for that. That's just piling on. If, on the other hand, we're giving tax credits, we've set up an exchange, you are now part of a big pool, we've driven down the costs, we've done everything we can and you actually can afford health insurance, but you've just decided, you know what, I want to take my chances. And then you get hit by a bus and you and I have to pay for the emergency room care, that's

STEPHANOPOULOS: That may be, but it's still a tax increase.

OBAMA: No. That's not true, George. Thefor us to say that you've got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase. What it's saying is, is that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore than the fact that right now everybody in America, just about, has to get auto insurance. Nobody considers that a tax increase. People say to themselves, that is a fair way to make sure that if you hit my car, that I'm not covering all the costs.

{snip}

STEPHANOPOULOS: But you reject that it's a tax increase?

OBAMA: I absolutely reject that notion.

Obama rejected characterizing insurance mandate as a tax in 2009

This is the largest tax increase in the history of the world, on a nation still reeling from El Presidente's war against the country, the economy and the people. A rebellion is coming.

Can you please find someone under 50 to lead it who isn't a raving lunatic or a fundamentalist?

The US spends from 16% to 18% (depending on who you ask, and when) of its Gross Domestic Product on health care. Among universal-coverage countries, Canada spends about 10%, Europe about 9%. Health, longevity, and happiness in these countries are comparable, with the US generally slightly behind. The US is getting poor value for its money. The situation is a drag on the US economy, surely as much a negative as an increased tax burden would be. Nothing as complicated as the Affordable Care Act is going to be perfect, but I think it's a step in the right direction.

Is it a tax increase if the hope is that no one will pay it, because it's meant not to collect revenue but to push people into the health insurance marketplace?

It would be interesting to hear, in this forum, from some of our members from outside the US, with their experience of very different health-care-delivery systems. What do you think the US should do about health care?

I find it both funny and sad that many on the right throw the term "socialism" around with clearly no appreciation for what the term really means.  Before you folks get out the tar and feathers intended for me, let me firmly state I am a private market capitalist.  I AM NO SOCIALIST!  But, if you really want to add something positive to the dialog, please know more about which you speak!  Far too many use the term without that knowledge.  As it is, the sound and fury employed signify little, except to tell me, "Gee, I don't want to pay attention to this ranting and raving."  If you want a real dialog, can we avoid the name calling, sloganeering and get to a discussion - let me say that again - discussion - of the facts of the issues?

The US spends from 16% to 18% (depending on who you ask, and when) of its Gross Domestic Product on health care.

And where do the people of other countries go when they want good, quick health care? How many Canadians cross the border for US health care as compared to Americans going to Canada for it?

Europe about 9%.

Ask the victims of the UK's NHS how good it is. And ask anyone who lives in Europe how wonderful life is there, with the Euro on the verge of collapse and riots in the streets because the governments are finally grokking that overburdened taxpayers supporting hundreds of millions of functionless parasites is a disastrous policy.

The situation is a drag on the US economy, surely as much a negative as an increased tax burden would be.

If the government would get the hell out of the way and let the private sector do what it does best, there would be vast improvements. However, liberals worship the water that Megagovernment walks on and fantasize that all problems in the universe can be solved by government intrusion and control. They are unable to point to ONE government program that actually did what was it was supposed to do, on time, and on or under budget. NOT ONE.

Nothing as complicated as the Affordable Care Act is going to be perfect...

We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.
-- Nancy "Botox" Pelosi

She had no clue what the bill said. Not one asswipe who voted for it actually read it. And those contemptible pricks attack anyone who actually DOES read it and understand it and then dares to speak out about it.

The bill has one purpose only: massive government control over every aspect of the lives of the citizens of the US. Liberals have wet dreams about that absolute power over the people.

... but I think it's a step in the right direction.

If one's "direction" is toward an unlimited, uncontrollable, unaccountable Nanny State, that is a true statement.

=================================================

I find it both funny and sad that many on the right...

And I find it appalling that there are people to whom "the right" is supposed to be an invective, as though "the right" is the fountainhead of all evil in the universe and several parallel dimensions. 

... throw the term "socialism" around with clearly no appreciation for what the term really means.

From Merriam Webster...

Definition of SOCIALISM
1
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Google search for Europe socialism: About 19,800,000 results (0.24 seconds)

One would conclude that those who speak of European socialism are more informed than their critics.

If you want a real dialog, can we avoid the name calling, sloganeering and get to a discussion - let me say that again - discussion - of the facts of the issues?

Liberals and facts are mutually exclusive. That said, is there anyone who can dispute these facts?

* Obamacare premise #1: tens of millions more people will have health care coverage.
* Obamacare premise #2: the cost of heath care in the US will be reduced.
* Logic dictates that the two premises are mutually exclusive UNLESS drastic steps are taken.
* What demographic is the primary consumer of health care services? A: the elderly, the infirm and the chronically ill.
* How can Obamacare add tens of millions of new people and still reduce the costs? A: eliminate the demographic that is the greatest burden to the system.
* How will that be done? A: by using the "quality of life" argument that was first proposed with Hillarycare.
* Conclusion: if a person is old, infirm or chronically ill, their "quality of life" will not be improved by medicare care, and it will therefore be denied to them, ergo sentencing them to death. Count on euthenasia becoming law.

And remember this exchange between the Kenyan Liar-In-Chief, Obastard, and Jane Sturm.

Sturm: My mother is now over 105. But at 100, the doctors said to her, I cant do anything more unless you have a pacemaker. I said, Go for it. She said, Go for it. But the specialist said, No, shes too old. But when the other specialist saw her and saw her joy of life, he said, Im going for it. That was over five years ago. My question to you is: Outside the medical criteria for prolonging life for somebody who is elderly, is there any consideration that can be given for a certain spirit, a certain joy of living, a quality of life, or is it just a medical cutoff at a certain age?

Obasshole: "We're not gonna solve every difficult problem in terms of end-of-life care. A lot of that is gonna ... we as a culture and as a society starting to make better decisions within our own families and for ourselves. But what we can do is make sure that at least some of the waste that exists in the system that's not making anybody's mom better, that is loading up on additional tests or additional drugs that the evidence shows is not necessarily gonna improve care, that at least we can let doctors know and your mom know that you know what maybe this isn't gonna help, maybe you're better off not having the surgery but taking the pain pill."

Obama's idea of "treatment": old people are expendable, so fuck them! Give them pain killers and let them die. Liberal humanitarianism at its apex. And we are supposed to oooh and aaah over that loathsome son of a bitch. Oy!

I don't believe that bear is capable of causing an erection.  On himself or others.
"that the country that they love is being destroyed"  - Wow, now you know how most people felt during 8 years of a dumb Bush.

Conservatives want to leave the U.S. - But they can't find a wealthy western democracy without universal healthcare.
Limbaugh has said if the healthcare act is implemented, he's moving to Costa Rica.  Let's hold him to that.

And if you don't purchase an Obamacare policy, you'll be dealing with....the IRS?  WTF?????

I guess that you choose to ignore the facts of the total cost of two unfunded wars, the Grover Norquist pledge, the Wall Street bailout, etc.  
You folks need to take it easy.  Have a early bird special, a couple games of bingo, and settle in with your VHS tapes of the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson.  The black man isn't coming to get you and your barcalounger quite yet.

Well I just found out that The Supreme Court has decided Obama Care is constitutional and within Congress's Power to Tax.  How do you all feel about this?

Well From What I understand that if you Don't have health insurance (sort of like auto insurance) its just a small increase however I think the most who are complaining are the rich republicans who don't want to pay taxes. They should pay more cuz they make more.
The GOP lies 2 cause fear & anger & their electorate is largely uneducated. that's how they get over.

Definition of Liberal/Socialist/Marxist:  Anyone who doesn't think like you!

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a
permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up
until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous
gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always
vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public
treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due
to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."
                                                                                                 Alexander Tyler: 1787


"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:

1. From bondage to spiritual faith;

2. From spiritual faith to great courage;

3. From courage to liberty;

4. From liberty to abundance;

5. From abundance to complacency;

6. From complacency to apathy;

7. From apathy to dependence;

8. From dependence back into bondage"

Advice to all conservatives: don't despair over the SCOTUS ruling. The DemonicRATs were hoping for Ocare to be thrown out, which would give them a smokescreen to hide behind until Nov 6. It's now moot, and they must defend Obastard on his record. Lotsa luck! High unemployment, skyrocketing taxes, crushing debt, catering to illegals -- it's a really bad time to be a DemonicRAT. ;-)

Well From What I understand that if you Don't have health insurance (sort of like auto insurance) its just a small increase...

What you "understand" is liberal propaganda. Under Obastardcare, you WILL have insurance, whether you want it or not. For the first couple of years, the fine for refusing will be less than the premiums, but then the fines skyrocket and rapidly go higher than the premiums. As well, you can wind up in prison for not groveling at the feet of the Nanny State.

D&J posted, "And if you don't purchase an Obamacare policy, you'll be dealing with....the IRS?  WTF?????" Obasshole needs enforcers for his new megatax, and IRS goons are his thugs. It's also further proof that the Kenyan Marxist's claim that Ocare is not a tax was so much arrant bullshit, a bald-faced lie from the World Champion liar.

=================================================

however I think the most who are complaining are the rich republicans who don't want to pay taxes. They should pay more cuz they make more.

Ah, FUCK! Another clueless class-warfare "Occupier". Kid, did you ever bother to research WHO is actually paying taxes in the US? The latest readily available data is this from 2005.

* The top 1% pay over a third, 34.27% of all income taxes. (Up from 2003: 33.71%)
* The top 5% pay 54.36% of all income taxes (Up from 2002: 53.80%).
* The top 10% pay 65.84% (Up from 2002: 65.73%).
* The top 25% pay 83.88% (Down from 2002: 83.90%).
* The top 50% pay 96.54% (Up from 2002: 96.50%).
* The bottom 50% pay 3.46% of all income taxes (Down from 2002: 3.50%).
* The top 1% pay almost as much in fed income taxes as the bottom 50%.

It is arguable that those numbers are even more stark in 2012. No doubt that is "fair" to the economically illiterate, whose competence with economic matters ends at knowing how many quarters make a dollar. However, for a "deer in the headlights" look, ask them how many people are employed by the bottom 50%. How many companies have been started by the bottom 50%?

More to the point, what the fuck does the US government do that it needs to spend $3.8 trillion (the proposed 2013 budget)?

* The 1913 budget was $714,000,000.00. The 2013 budget is 532,200% of the 1913 budget.
* In 1913, a 1-pound loaf of bread cost 6 cents. If the price of bread increased in step with the federal budget, the bread would now cost $319.32.

To appreciate the enormity of $1 trillion...

* A $1 bill is 6.14" long. An end-to-end line of 1 trillion bills would be 96,906,565.66 miles long, from the center of the sun to about 3.6 million miles beyond Earth's orbit.

* It would take light, moving at 186,282 miles per second, 520 seconds or 8.67 minutes to travel the length of the line.

* A US bill is 0.0043 inches thick. A stack of 1 trillion $1 bills would be 67,866.16 miles high, 28.4% of the distance to the moon.

* The equator is 24,901.55 miles long. A trillion $1 bills would wrap around the equator 3,891.588 times, forming a wall 16.73 inches high.

* The King James Bible contains 3,116,480 letters. A trillion letters could fill 320,874 complete KJ Bibles plus the OT and 318,380 letters in the NT of another Bible.

* A $1 bill weighs 1 gram. 1 trillion bills would weigh 1,102,310 tons. That's equivalent to 2,423 Boeing 747-400ER/ERF jumbo jets at maximum take-off weight of 455 tons.
 
* A US penny weighs 2.5 grams. The USS Ronald Reagan weighs 98,235 tons at full displacement. $1 trillion in pennies would weigh 275,577,500 tons, equivalent to 2,805 USS Ronald Reagan carriers plus 28,325 tons more.

* One solar or tropical year = 31,556,925.51 seconds.

* * 1 trillion seconds is 31,688.765 solar years.
* * 1 trillion minutes is 1,901,325.9 solar years.
* * 1 trillion hours is 114,079,554 solar years.
* * 1 trillion days is 2,737,909,296 solar years.

* A car being driven at 60 MPH (88 feet/second) would travel 2,777,009,444.88 feet or 525,948.7585 miles in a solar year. To travel 1 trillion miles would require 1,901,325.9 solar years.

* To spend $1 trillion at $1/second would take 31,688.765 solar years.

* To spend $1 trillion in one solar year would require spending $31,688.765 per second.

The next time some politician glibly talks about a trillion dollars, keep those factoids in mind.

BTW, the US national debt is about $15,821,260,000,000 (source). Multiply the above numbers by 15.821 to appreciate that figure. 
 

The GOP lies 2 cause fear & anger & their electorate is largely uneducated. that's how they get over.

Your ignorance is profound, kid.

It ain't so great to be a repugnican either.  Just think.  Your presidential candidate is the man responsible for coming up with the affordable care act.  Good move.
I know that conservatives prefer the past to the present.  But their revisionism is wild.  Reagan was responsible for contributing more to the public debt than any other president by far, and he wasn't immune to tax increases.  
What you need to do is stop acting like Limbaugh babies and whining, and man up.  Git yer guns out and storm the Bastille or whatever else you do.  

Definition of Liberal/Socialist/Marxist:  Anyone who doesn't think like you!

  Definition of a wingnut, teabagger, nazi: Anyone who doesn't think like YOU!

Be careful what you wish for? It might come true. 

Definition of Liberal/Socialist/Marxist:  Anyone who doesn't think like you!

  Definition of a wingnut, teabagger, nazi: Anyone who doesn't think like YOU!

                                        

Aw, geez, another 20-something leftist looney vomits its indoctrination on the forum. Did your collij perfessers grade that POS?

Since, being retired after 38 years in industry, I have abundant free time to shred puking zit-poppers with delusions of maturity and education.

I wouldn't be so quick to throw the "economically illiterate" slur around, since you obviously have a pathetically simplistic understanding of our tax system and of the economy as a whole.

My understanding is based on living on my own in the real world almost twice as long as you've been alive, arrogant child. I was adept in economic matters when you were crapping in your Pampers.

As is so typical of rightwing gasbags everywhere...

Being called that by a brainwashed liberal pissant is an honor.

... (other than the fact that you copy/paste most of your retarded nonsense from rushlimbaugh.com)...

Whereas you get your specious bullshit from the alphabet nets' talking hairdos and multibillionaire Soros' hyperleftist spin machines. BTW, child, like all liberals, you NEVER challenge the information. You just attack the source.

For example, income tax is only one of a number of taxes that individuals pay.

No shit, Sherlockess! Golly gee willikers all gosharootie! Whoda thunk it? Jeez, thank you for that startling revelation.

It makes no sense to treat it as though it were the only tax that matters.

You might tell your fellow liberal loonies about that. Exactly what tax do you pathetic losers refer to when you demand that the rich pay their "fair share"?

Where are the payroll taxes in your calculation? Federal excise taxes? State and local taxes?

Are you liberal world-changers marching on Washington and the statehouses demanding that they increase the "Federal excise taxes" and the "State and local taxes" on the EEEEE-vill rich?

Oh let's conveniently forget about those, because once they are included your entire ideological bullshit house of cards falls apart.

Child, liberalism is 100% ideology. Reason, logic and fact are alien to liberals.

Take for example the fact that a majority of all working households in America pays more in payroll taxes than in federal income taxes.

And? Considering that almost half of US tax-filers pay no income tax whatever and many actually "get back" more than they put in (EIC, etc.), why is that supposed to be surprising?

And that low income earners pay a much larger share of their incomes in federal payroll taxes than high income people do. In 2007 the bottom 20% paid an average of 9 percent of their incomes in payroll taxes, while the top 1% paid an average of 2 percent.

Are you begrudging the top 1% their availing themselves of the intricacies of the tax laws (written by congressional members of the 1%) to their advantage?

The bottom quintile...

OOOOOOH! "Quintile"! The child knows the buzzwords. Color me suitably impressed.

... also pays higher local and state taxes, since most of these are regressive. This means that low-income families in general pay a larger share of their incomes than wealther households. According to the Institute of Taxation and Economic Policy, in 2011 the bottom fifth of taxpayers paid 12.3 percent of their incomes in local and state taxes, while the top 1% paid 7.9 percent.

Again, those are the tax laws. Only a liberal idiot would carp about people exploiting them for their advantage (while carefully avoiding bitching about wealthy liberals who also do so). And BTW, child, did they account for where the people in question live? State and local taxes differ widely, child.

Furthermore, according to data accumulated by the Congressional Budget Office low-income households pay a significantly larger share of their incomes in federal excise taxes than middle and upper income households do.

Another "OH NOES!" factoid that sounds impressive out of context. For those who are unfamiliar with what the babbling child is talking about...

Excise taxes, also known as manufacturer's excise taxes, are fees imposed by all levels of government on producers, manufacturers and importers of goods and activities. Taxes on goods are usually passed on to the consumer as the normal cost of doing business. The amount of the tax is occasionally posted for the consumer, with an example being the information attached to gasoline pumps. However, the amount is often simply incorporated into the price without any notation.

What Is a Federal Excise Tax?

What the child fails to mention is that if Joe is making $5K/month and Jim is making $50K/month, that does not translate to Jim buying ten times as much stuff.

* If Joe buys 100 gallons of gas per month for his car, he pays $18.40 in federal excise tax on it (18.4 cents per gallon). That is 0.368% of his monthly income.

* If Jim buys 200 gallons per month, he pays $36.80 in federal excise tax on it. That is 0.0736% of his monthly income.

According to the clueless collij child, Jim is EEEEE-vill because he is spending a lower percentage of his income on the excise taxes than Joe. And according to liberalosers, that isn't "fair".

That same effect applies to all excise and sales taxes. The consumers, whether wealthy or low-income, pay those taxes based solely on what they buy. There is exactly zero correlation of annual income with how much someone purchases. Ergo the child's lament is arrant bullshit.

When you take all taxes into consideration instead of focusing narrowly on income taxes only, the bottom 20% pays an average of 16 to 17 percent of their incomes in taxes.

Of those, child, how many are directly affected by income? Another example that the child will not mention.

* Harry is making $100K per year. His home is valued for real estate tax purposes at $200k. He therefore pays X dollars in taxes on it each year.

* Sam is making $1 million per year. His home is valued at $500K. He therefore pays 2.5X per year in taxes on it.

Therefore, although Sam is making 10 times as much as Harry each year, he is "only" paying 2.5 times as much real estate tax. And according to liberalosers, that isn't "fair".

This of course flies in the face of Republican dogma, which has it that poor people don't pay anything in taxes and thus has no "skin in the game" (as claimed by the Cato Institute and Fox Business among others). This is based on a narrow interpretation of the tax system, which only calculates federal income taxes to skew the facts.

The child continues to bend and twist reality to suit its liberal agenda. The only basis for accurately computing the tax burden based solely on income levels is the income tax. And on that basis, the mumbers provided in post #21 are accurate. And when liberalosers demand that the rich pay more taxes, it is based only on income taxes.

Those who don't pay federal income taxes are working people who pay paroll taxes...

Since the child neglected to list those payroll taxes, here are the federal taxes that apply nationally as of 2012.

* Federal withholding tax aka income tax - no limit, based on brackets, dependents, etc.
* Social Security - 4.2% of income, capped at $110,000, maximum $4,624.20; it was 6.2% until the Liar-In-Chief reduced it to deceive the sheeple.
* Medicare - 1.45% of income, no cap.

States and municipalities add their own taxes, but since they vary with location, using them in calculations is deceptive (which is why liberals do it).

... elderly people with modest incomes...

Of which I am one, little child.

... the unemployed...

There's a shitload more of them since your Marxist Kenyan rock idol polluted the People's House with his loathsome presence.

... or people with incomes so low that they fall beneath taxable incomes.

They don't pay income taxes. Should they also not pay consumption taxes?

So millionaires and billionaires pay more in income taxes than those people? Well cry me a fucking river!

The issue, child, is not that they pay more. That is expected. It is the grossly disproportionate tax rates that are at issue, and fucking clueless, craniorectally-impacted, liberal morons like you think that it still isn't enough. Class envy is one of liberalism's stock-in-trade tactics.

It is nothing less than grotesque how rightwing blowhards like you will stop at nothing to willify the poor and disabled, the homeless and the unemployed...

Nice try, child. But now you have the duty to show where I did that or be proven a shameless liar as well as a braindead asshole. By the way, illiterate child, the word is spelled "vilify". Have your mommy show you how to use a dictionary so that you won't make such a consummate ass of yourself.

... while propping up the ultra-rich and lamenting how we should all pity them for paying income taxes.

Tell ya what, child. When you grow up, leave your parents' home, and start out on your own, be sure to seek employment in companies owned by lower-class people. IAC, judging by your post, you might just be barely qualified for certain undemanding positions in lawn care or fast foods.

It goes to show what a warped la-la-land your entire self-serving ideology is hatched in.

I'll give you a few moments to let your mommy wipe your spittle from her 'puter keyboard. * play Final Jeopardy theme here * ......... okay, let's continue.

You may huff and puff and scream and whine about 'libruls' and 'democRATS' all you like...

I don't recall asking for or requiring your permission, librul democRAT.

... but in the end you are little more than bloated infantile diaper babies...

Breathe ... breathe ... breathe ...

... who incessantly whine about having to contribute to the very country you hypocritically claim to love.

What would you know about loving this country, you pompous, prattling, puerile pissant? Your entire worldview is shaped by the tenured, America-loathing parasites in academia and the plethora of hyperleftist websites. Come back when you grow up, child.

A country, by the way, that has some of the lowest tax rates in the industrialized world...

No thanks to liberals, to whom monolithic, uncontrollable, unaccountable megagovernment overseeing every aspect of their worthless, functionless lives is nirvana.

... and a tax system so riddled with loop holes and byzantine rules, that many of the top grossing corporations, banks and private billionaires pay either ZERO in taxes, or have negative federal tax rates.

Talk to the millionaires in Congress who wrote the tax laws, child. The fact that you cannot abide with people of wealth exploiting those "loop holes and byzantine rules" tells me that you are insanely jealous of them.

Despite Republican propaganda, we do NOT have one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. It may look like it on paper (39,2 percent), but due to loopholes and subsidies, the effective tax rate is at 12.1 percent of the profits.

The paper rate is the official rate, child. The "loopholes and subsidies" don't change that. And IAC you are again sniveling about corporations using existing tax laws to their advantage.

What is amusing is the thought that if you should ever own a business, you would NOT avail yourself of those "loopholes and subsidies".

The lowest it has been since 1972.

And?

Don't let that discourage you from beating the same old dead horse about how Obama...

If I ever need an authority on the taste of Obastard's feces, you'll be near the top of my list.

... is the big TAX-MONSTER of the Apocalypse! Taxes in America are at an all time low.

You probably believe that, but you no doubt also believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. That aside, thanks to the Kenyan traitor and his lackies, the US national debt is at an all time high and the latest change of the mythological "debt ceiling" is due in the fall. After it is approved, the US debt will be over $17 trillion ($17,000,000,000,000) based on previous increases. Thanks to fucking big-government liberals, that debt will NEVER be repaid. It is literally impossible.

What is the ONLY way to reduce it, let alone pay it off? A: crushing taxation. Your ignorant liberal fantasies cannot alter that cold, hard, stark reality.

Obasshole and his toadies have guaranteed that our children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren and great-great-grandchildren will be saddled with the debt that you liberalosers have inflicted on America. Is that your concept of loving your country, imbecile?

Of course that isn't much comfort to the raving rightwing lunatics who believe we can have 0 taxes and still maintain a civilization. The bottom just isn't far enough for these people.

That mindless drivel from the world-class moron is a good closing line. God help us if idiots like that ever come into positions of power.

This thread illustrates a very important point.  Those of you  on the left and the right seem to forget in all your posturing, name calling, selective statement of facts, outright mis-statements of historic facts and the like, you are completely turning off increasing numbers of people who will no longer vote for ideologues and worse.  We may be stalemated in so many ways, but that does indicate that neither extreme can gain ascendancy.  HOOOOOOOOOOORRRRAYYYYYYYYYYY for moderation!  Despite all the sound and fury, there are more and more moderates.  No longer an endangered species!!!  Back to governing for the well being of the country - something the far right and left seem to have completely forgotten!