[cr]

[quote=TheBreeze]Give me an effin’ break. Most people get paid based on the market for their skills. If someone is willing to work hard, they can always improve their lot in life. If the current rich asshole I’m working for won’t pay me for my skills, I’ll just go work for some other rich asshole.
[/quote]

Like politicians? Oh wait…

Chill out Breezy, you’re going to have a heat attack just because I posted some cold hard facts about your precious little terrorist candidate and his jackass party.

You want to see more “skills” go check out the crime rates in the Chicago neighborhoods Obama “organized”, or his push for Subprime lending in the late 90’s.

Think he’s so skeel’d now?

And, implying that everyone who dislikes Obama is a hick only shows further evidence of your own ignorance.

People like you are all the more reason why I’m sick of BOTH parties. Obama is MSM poster child, and somehow that gleaning smile causes them to look past so many faults it’s astounding. And I don’t think McCain is any better.

But hey, if you want to listen to P-Diddy, MTV cronies, MSM fodder, and follow the sheople off the cliff into Obamanation be my guest.

And btw, if you actually read my post, you’d see I pasted that info, I didn’t write it.

[cr]

[quote=TheBreeze]Give me an effin’ break. Most people get paid based on the market for their skills. If someone is willing to work hard, they can always improve their lot in life. If the current rich asshole I’m working for won’t pay me for my skills, I’ll just go work for some other rich asshole.
[/quote]

Like politicians? Oh wait…

Chill out Breezy, you’re going to have a heat attack just because I posted some cold hard facts about your precious little terrorist candidate and his jackass party.

You want to see more “skills” go check out the crime rates in the Chicago neighborhoods Obama “organized”, or his push for Subprime lending in the late 90’s.

Think he’s so skeel’d now?

And, implying that everyone who dislikes Obama is a hick only shows further evidence of your own ignorance.

People like you are all the more reason why I’m sick of BOTH parties. Obama is MSM poster child, and somehow that gleaning smile causes them to look past so many faults it’s astounding. And I don’t think McCain is any better.

But hey, if you want to listen to P-Diddy, MTV cronies, MSM fodder, and follow the sheople off the cliff into Obamanation be my guest.

And btw, if you actually read my post, you’d see I pasted that info, I didn’t write it.

[cr]

[quote=esmith]The government should not discriminate against civil unions between consenting adults solely because those unions don’t conform to the definition used in a certain religion.

It can be argued that a child cannot consent to marriage (although examples of children getting married off to adults are present even in the Bible), same with the dog.

There are probably many laws on the books that implicitly assume that marriage is always between two people. It would be technically challenging to include polygamy; other than that, I don’t see why it should be excluded.
[/quote]

I do. Because marriage between a man and a woman has nothing to do with religion. Thou shalt not murder – is that “religious” too?

Just because something is supported by people who also happen to go to church doesn’t mean it’s exclusively a religious value being shoved down atheistic throats. It’s a family value, and there are plenty of non-religious married men and women who value marriage too.

When marriage laws were written they probably never even thought to specify only between a man and a woman. They didn’t need to back then.

You prove my point. You can’t fathom the law allowing 3 people to be married, but at the time the marrige laws were written they couldn’t fathom it being anything but a man and a woman.

[cr]

[quote=esmith]The government should not discriminate against civil unions between consenting adults solely because those unions don’t conform to the definition used in a certain religion.

It can be argued that a child cannot consent to marriage (although examples of children getting married off to adults are present even in the Bible), same with the dog.

There are probably many laws on the books that implicitly assume that marriage is always between two people. It would be technically challenging to include polygamy; other than that, I don’t see why it should be excluded.
[/quote]

I do. Because marriage between a man and a woman has nothing to do with religion. Thou shalt not murder – is that “religious” too?

Just because something is supported by people who also happen to go to church doesn’t mean it’s exclusively a religious value being shoved down atheistic throats. It’s a family value, and there are plenty of non-religious married men and women who value marriage too.

When marriage laws were written they probably never even thought to specify only between a man and a woman. They didn’t need to back then.

You prove my point. You can’t fathom the law allowing 3 people to be married, but at the time the marrige laws were written they couldn’t fathom it being anything but a man and a woman.

[cr]

[quote=esmith]The government should not discriminate against civil unions between consenting adults solely because those unions don’t conform to the definition used in a certain religion.

It can be argued that a child cannot consent to marriage (although examples of children getting married off to adults are present even in the Bible), same with the dog.

There are probably many laws on the books that implicitly assume that marriage is always between two people. It would be technically challenging to include polygamy; other than that, I don’t see why it should be excluded.
[/quote]

I do. Because marriage between a man and a woman has nothing to do with religion. Thou shalt not murder – is that “religious” too?

Just because something is supported by people who also happen to go to church doesn’t mean it’s exclusively a religious value being shoved down atheistic throats. It’s a family value, and there are plenty of non-religious married men and women who value marriage too.

When marriage laws were written they probably never even thought to specify only between a man and a woman. They didn’t need to back then.

You prove my point. You can’t fathom the law allowing 3 people to be married, but at the time the marrige laws were written they couldn’t fathom it being anything but a man and a woman.

[cr]

[quote=esmith]The government should not discriminate against civil unions between consenting adults solely because those unions don’t conform to the definition used in a certain religion.

It can be argued that a child cannot consent to marriage (although examples of children getting married off to adults are present even in the Bible), same with the dog.

There are probably many laws on the books that implicitly assume that marriage is always between two people. It would be technically challenging to include polygamy; other than that, I don’t see why it should be excluded.
[/quote]

I do. Because marriage between a man and a woman has nothing to do with religion. Thou shalt not murder – is that “religious” too?

Just because something is supported by people who also happen to go to church doesn’t mean it’s exclusively a religious value being shoved down atheistic throats. It’s a family value, and there are plenty of non-religious married men and women who value marriage too.

When marriage laws were written they probably never even thought to specify only between a man and a woman. They didn’t need to back then.

You prove my point. You can’t fathom the law allowing 3 people to be married, but at the time the marrige laws were written they couldn’t fathom it being anything but a man and a woman.

[cr]

[quote=esmith]The government should not discriminate against civil unions between consenting adults solely because those unions don’t conform to the definition used in a certain religion.

It can be argued that a child cannot consent to marriage (although examples of children getting married off to adults are present even in the Bible), same with the dog.

There are probably many laws on the books that implicitly assume that marriage is always between two people. It would be technically challenging to include polygamy; other than that, I don’t see why it should be excluded.
[/quote]

I do. Because marriage between a man and a woman has nothing to do with religion. Thou shalt not murder – is that “religious” too?

Just because something is supported by people who also happen to go to church doesn’t mean it’s exclusively a religious value being shoved down atheistic throats. It’s a family value, and there are plenty of non-religious married men and women who value marriage too.

When marriage laws were written they probably never even thought to specify only between a man and a woman. They didn’t need to back then.

You prove my point. You can’t fathom the law allowing 3 people to be married, but at the time the marrige laws were written they couldn’t fathom it being anything but a man and a woman.

[cr]

I don’t know when, but probably sooner than later rates will have to go up.

If they hit 13% I’m going to look for a 30 year CD.

[cr]

I don’t know when, but probably sooner than later rates will have to go up.

If they hit 13% I’m going to look for a 30 year CD.

[cr]

I don’t know when, but probably sooner than later rates will have to go up.

If they hit 13% I’m going to look for a 30 year CD.

[cr]

I don’t know when, but probably sooner than later rates will have to go up.

If they hit 13% I’m going to look for a 30 year CD.

[cr]

I don’t know when, but probably sooner than later rates will have to go up.

If they hit 13% I’m going to look for a 30 year CD.

[cr]

How anyone truly believes taxes will be lower under Obama is beyond me. The first thing he will do is repeal the Bush tax cuts. Those only helped the rich?

Well, if you’re not rich you likely work for someone who is, and if that person has to pay higher taxes, kiss that raise good bye. “Spread the wealth”

Came across this info somewhere else and thought it a fitting preview of the liberal takeover:

PART 1: Remember the election in 2006?

A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.

Since voting in a Democratically controlled Congress in 2006 we have seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

America voted for “change” in 2006, and we got it! Remember, it’s Congress that makes the law not the President. He has to work with what’s handed him.

Quote of the Day:
“My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you’ll join with me as we try to change it.” — Barack Obama

PART 2: TAXES
Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html

Taxes under Clinton 1999……………Taxes under Bush 2008
Single making 30K – tax $8,400………. Single making 30K – tax $4,500
Single making 50K – tax $14,000………Single making 50K – tax $12,500
Single making 75K – tax $23,250………Single making 75K – tax $18,750
Married making 60K – tax $16,800…….Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K – tax $21,000…….Married making 75K – tax $18,750
Married making 125K – tax $38,750…..Married making 125K – tax $31,250

Barack Hussein Obama (don’t you just love his middle name) will return to the higher tax rates.

It is amazing how many people who fall into the categories above think Bush is screwing them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Barack Hussein Obama is elected, he will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people who fall into the categories above can’t wait for it to happen. This is like the movie The Sting with Paul Newman; you scam somebody out of some money and they don’t even know what happened.

PART 3: Illegal Immigration

You think the war in Iraq is costing us too much? Read this…(it goes on to say how illegal immigration costs the US over $300 billion/year.)

[cr]

How anyone truly believes taxes will be lower under Obama is beyond me. The first thing he will do is repeal the Bush tax cuts. Those only helped the rich?

Well, if you’re not rich you likely work for someone who is, and if that person has to pay higher taxes, kiss that raise good bye. “Spread the wealth”

Came across this info somewhere else and thought it a fitting preview of the liberal takeover:

PART 1: Remember the election in 2006?

A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.

Since voting in a Democratically controlled Congress in 2006 we have seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

America voted for “change” in 2006, and we got it! Remember, it’s Congress that makes the law not the President. He has to work with what’s handed him.

Quote of the Day:
“My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you’ll join with me as we try to change it.” — Barack Obama

PART 2: TAXES
Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html

Taxes under Clinton 1999……………Taxes under Bush 2008
Single making 30K – tax $8,400………. Single making 30K – tax $4,500
Single making 50K – tax $14,000………Single making 50K – tax $12,500
Single making 75K – tax $23,250………Single making 75K – tax $18,750
Married making 60K – tax $16,800…….Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K – tax $21,000…….Married making 75K – tax $18,750
Married making 125K – tax $38,750…..Married making 125K – tax $31,250

Barack Hussein Obama (don’t you just love his middle name) will return to the higher tax rates.

It is amazing how many people who fall into the categories above think Bush is screwing them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Barack Hussein Obama is elected, he will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people who fall into the categories above can’t wait for it to happen. This is like the movie The Sting with Paul Newman; you scam somebody out of some money and they don’t even know what happened.

PART 3: Illegal Immigration

You think the war in Iraq is costing us too much? Read this…(it goes on to say how illegal immigration costs the US over $300 billion/year.)

[cr]

How anyone truly believes taxes will be lower under Obama is beyond me. The first thing he will do is repeal the Bush tax cuts. Those only helped the rich?

Well, if you’re not rich you likely work for someone who is, and if that person has to pay higher taxes, kiss that raise good bye. “Spread the wealth”

Came across this info somewhere else and thought it a fitting preview of the liberal takeover:

PART 1: Remember the election in 2006?

A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.

Since voting in a Democratically controlled Congress in 2006 we have seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

America voted for “change” in 2006, and we got it! Remember, it’s Congress that makes the law not the President. He has to work with what’s handed him.

Quote of the Day:
“My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you’ll join with me as we try to change it.” — Barack Obama

PART 2: TAXES
Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html

Taxes under Clinton 1999……………Taxes under Bush 2008
Single making 30K – tax $8,400………. Single making 30K – tax $4,500
Single making 50K – tax $14,000………Single making 50K – tax $12,500
Single making 75K – tax $23,250………Single making 75K – tax $18,750
Married making 60K – tax $16,800…….Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K – tax $21,000…….Married making 75K – tax $18,750
Married making 125K – tax $38,750…..Married making 125K – tax $31,250

Barack Hussein Obama (don’t you just love his middle name) will return to the higher tax rates.

It is amazing how many people who fall into the categories above think Bush is screwing them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Barack Hussein Obama is elected, he will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people who fall into the categories above can’t wait for it to happen. This is like the movie The Sting with Paul Newman; you scam somebody out of some money and they don’t even know what happened.

PART 3: Illegal Immigration

You think the war in Iraq is costing us too much? Read this…(it goes on to say how illegal immigration costs the US over $300 billion/year.)

[Author]

Posts