Wow, your world view is twisted.
You think the GOVERNMENT, not the individual should be the primary provider of "opportunities" and you think the right way to go is to grant un-constitutional powers ( and your Navy retired ? You should be ashamed ) to a massive bureaucracy so they can offer "FREE" healthcare and free " college education " and to pay for this you want to " raise taxes" on the middle class ?
Well, seeing as how this is how the most successful nations of the world ALREADY work, then...YES. It's like this, guy - you might not like the guys who win the most World Series...but if you're a betting man, you're still going to bet on the ones who win the most. Like most people outside the Big Apple, I hate the Yankees - but I'm not stupid enough to bet against them. Likewise, you may hate Big Government with every fiber of your being...but the most successful nations on the planet are almost without exception the very type you h ate the most.
Because Liberal Democrats don't tax the poor and " the rich " will simply MOVE !!! I mean really, either their money or themselves so the middle class is the only people left with any taxable income. Tax the Corporations then ? Hell why don't we drive all of our jobs over seas ?
Really? The rich will simply 'move'? Back in the 1950's, our top marginal tax rate was NINETY PERCENT. But did our rich just 'move away' to tax havens? No. Instead, they put their money back into their businesses - and so didn't have to pay that tax - and everyone profited as a result.
And NO Christian I know argues for a w omens right to kill her unborn child. Where did you get your Bible ? From the DNC ?
Actually, I find that most people who claim to be Christian aren't aware that Jesus was really much closer to socialism than to democracy. But then, I find that most people who claim to be Christian aren't Christian at all - for instance, if you really dig into the Greek, the Hebrew, and the Aramaic, there's no hard Biblical proof that Jesus is God (nor a 'mighty God' as the JW's claim) - quite the opposite, in fact.
When it comes to abortion, who are you to tell a woman what she can and can't do with her body? And did you see the point earlier where I said that I've been a Foster parent of medically-fragile children for fifteen years? The one who's been with us the whole time has fetal drug syndrome (and we had one with fetal alcohol syndrome) - which means he breathes through a trach tube, eats through a g-tube, has rods in his back, has serious seizure disorders, has a cleft palate, and cannot communicate with us...and until he turned 18, it cost the state taxpayers a quarter million dollars a year to take care of him - now it's about half that, since his nursing hours have been slashed.
Anyway, he'll need this completely taxpayer-funded care all his life - and he may well outlive me. He'll never have a job, never have a family, will always need 100% care. And this has to do with the abortion argument how? It's not the argument about the taxes - that's beside the point. The REAL argument is that if the pro-birth crowd really cared about the unborn, they'd be out there doing their utmost to keep pregnant women from drinking alcohol or taking drugs, so that children like my Foster child wouldn't be born with absolutely unnecessary birth defects, to live a life of loneliness and physical misery (not to mention the very real drag on state resources). When I see the pro-birth crowd going out there to the ghettos and poverty-stricken to prevent tragedies like those of my Foster child, then I'll pay attention to them. But not before.
And lets forget the economic implications of your short sighted and foolish plan which would be profound and not in a good way. The fact you think the math even comes close to adding up is proof enough that Liberal progressivism is a ideological cancer. All you argue for is a sentiment that can't be quantified in real world terms.
Except for the small fact that ALL the first-world democracies already work this way - including America, if to a lesser extent than the others do. Again, it's like you're claiming that the way that the Chicago Cubs are run is the best way to win the World Series, and the way the Yankees win the World Series is the way to the dustbin of history.
Look your idiot President has already blown through 7 TRILLION dollars, and what do we have to show for it ? Nada.....
Hm. Let me see here - our federal tax burden is lower NOW than at any time since the early 1950's, than under Bush 43, Bush 41, Reagan, Nixon, OR Eisenhower. He was handed an economic s**t sandwich when he took office, and since its nadir two months afterward, the Dow Jones has more than doubled. The 2009 budget was written by Bush 43...and since that budget, the deficit has been cut by about 40% IIRC. He got us out of Iraq, and will have us out of Afghanistan next year. He got bin Laden. He got a patently REPUBLICAN idea - the Individual Mandate - passed. AND he did all this while being faced with the most obstructive Congress since the Civil War.
Hell, guy, if he'd been Republican, you'd have been calling him the Second Coming of Reagan. But since he he's got a (D) after his name, well, nothing he's done now or may do in the future could ever, ever be a good thing.
But your'e going to finance free health care and free college education with " tax increases "? Or a cut in defense ?
It works for the rest of the first-world democracies - ask any Australian if they want to give up their health care - and ask any German if they want to give up their largely free education through college. And if you'll look, their economies are not doing badly at all.
IF you were in the Navy you would be well aware of what happens in this world when the United States shows weakness. Either by cutting military spending or electing ass clowns with no leadership qualities.
*chuckle* - and I was happy to see the end of Don't-Ask, Don't-Tell, too.
( Obama and Carter ) From our Hostages in Iran to 9/11. ( we can thank Gorelick and Clinton for that )
You mean the 9/11 that Bush 43 was warned about several times in his daily intelligence briefings? And when it comes to Iran, I really can't blame them. Now while your head is exploding, how would YOU feel about Iran if, say, Iran was the most powerful nation in the world, and Iran had come over here and engineered a coup of our democratically-elected government and replaced it with a monarchy? Because that's what we did to Iran back in the 1950's.
