Does GDP growth mean Federal Tax revenue growth?

[OKTexas]

I already told you dip shit, the commiecrats refused to vote for middle class tax cuts. They'd rather screw the middle class than give Trump a victory. It's that resist thing..

That is not a reason why the Conservatives made your tax cut temporary and the tax cut for the rich permanent. Why didn't they make your tax cut permanent and the cut for the wealthy temporary?

Asked and answered, and the tax breaks for wealthy individuals expire at the same time as every one else. Yep, you're not too smart.


.

 

[healthmyths]

GEEZ you should talk! "you'll do your own fucking research,

I do my research and happily support all my claims. You rely on memes and things you copied from other people and then can't explain the details of what you're posting, insisting instead that we do that for you.

You're a fucking leech.

I've NEVER seen one supporting link! You are a LIAR.

And as far as "memes" I created these!
View attachment 176540

 

[Brain357]

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

 

[healthmyths]

Well your statement: "Bush was handed a thriving economy " is 100% wrong!

No, you're wrong. Bush was handed an economy at full employment, an economy that even with the mild 2001 recession still grew in 2001; GDP growth in 2001 was still positive, even with 9/11 and the recession. I can't help it that you Conservatives can't manage an economy under any circumstances. Bush was handed a budget surplus, one that he could have used to retrain those thousands of out-of-work dotcom workers to rebuild our nation's power grid. But what did you guys do instead? You passed tax cuts that didn't pay for themselves, that didn't create any jobs, and that had a hand in creating the housing bubble that would burst just a few years later.

Conservative policy never works as advertised, and it's not supposed to. Conservative policy is meant to destroy the economy so they can remake it into the fascist, theocratic state they've always wanted.

Where is your proof?
Don't see ONE link to any FACTS! All those comments have LINKS! Where are YOURS???

 

[rightwinger]

Well your statement: "Bush was handed a thriving economy " is 100% wrong!

No, you're wrong. Bush was handed an economy at full employment, an economy that even with the mild 2001 recession still grew in 2001; GDP growth in 2001 was still positive, even with 9/11 and the recession. I can't help it that you Conservatives can't manage an economy under any circumstances. Bush was handed a budget surplus, one that he could have used to retrain those thousands of out-of-work dotcom workers to rebuild our nation's power grid. But what did you guys do instead? You passed tax cuts that didn't pay for themselves, that didn't create any jobs, and that had a hand in creating the housing bubble that would burst just a few years later.

Conservative policy never works as advertised, and it's not supposed to. Conservative policy is meant to destroy the economy so they can remake it into the fascist, theocratic state they've always wanted.

Where is your proof?
Don't see ONE link to any FACTS! All those comments have LINKS! Where are YOURS???
View attachment 176572

Bush43 = Worst Modern President

 

[kaz]

who says tax cuts aren't cuts unless they're net cuts?

Depends on the discussion. I was talking about economic impact though, so since you were responding to that, they aren't cuts unless they are net cuts

LOL! Yeah, so thanks for admitting you just arbitrarily redefine parameters depending on how your argument is faring.

Seriously? You don't grasp using words in context? What grade are you in? Wait until middle school, way cool ...

You just said the definition changes depending on the conversation, which means the definition changes according to how your argument is faring.

Pick a definition and stick to it. This isn't a "context" issue...this is you changing the meaning of what you say mid-conversation depending on how your argument is faring at any given time.

Strawman. I didn't say that my "definition" changes. My ability to know what the point I was making changes.

So just to be clear, you claim that anyone can pull any sentence out of any discussion you ever made and you can tell them what your point was?

Fubar, kiddie. Enjoy middle school, you have a lot to learn.

derp, derp

 

[kaz]

who says tax cuts aren't cuts unless they're net cuts?

Depends on the discussion. I was talking about economic impact though, so since you were responding to that, they aren't cuts unless they are net cuts

There is no discernible positive economic impact of tax cuts like the kind you support.

You made me laugh. LOL. Socialists ...

There isn't and there never will be.

It wasn't there when Bush the Dumber cut taxes.
It wasn't there when Brownback the Skidmark cut taxes.
It's not going to be there when Trump the Traitor cuts taxes.

Give up the ghost already. Your bullshit ideology has no track record of success and never will. Time to admit you were conned, and that you're not as clever or intuitive as you think; that your instincts are poor and you're susceptible to scams.

Actually, my bullshit ideology created the greatest, richest and most powerful country in the history of the world, the United States. You and the rest of the leaches are finally pulling us down.

Gocha, Karl. Taxes don't affect economic growth. Wow you're an idiot.

Just curious what triggered your epiphany that you know more about economics than economists do. I'm thinking because leftist lawyers told you and you aren't capable of questioning

 

[kaz]

You just said you didn't know leftists were predicting Trump would be globally catastrophic and you're calling me lazy?

Yes, you're incredibly lazy because you make the assertion and then don't back it up. Instead you expect me to rely on your word. Why the fuck should I? What the fuck have you done to establish that level of trust? Nothing. You're just a lazy fucking dupe. So when you make wild claims like this, it's expected that you back those claims up.

I'll tell you what. For amusement, I'll do your research for you. One condition. When I show you that leftists said that, what are you going to do? Call them a bunch of stupid idiots?

You mean, you'll do your own fucking research, which you should have done in the first place before you even post this garbage. Secondly, the market has entered catastrophe, dropping more than 10% in the last week alone. All the other global markets have followed suit and lost 10%+ of their value as well. So even if you can dig up some half-baked bullshit quote, the quote would be accurate since the markets have lost so much over the last week

So a market correction is a global "catastrophe?" The markets are still higher than when he took office. This is why wasting any time proving anything to you is a waste of time.

You're intellectually dishonest and a total sheep. You wouldn't believe water is wet if that served your God, the Democrat party.

Where do you get this idea you can issue homework assignments anyway?[/QUOTE]

 

[rightwinger]

I already told you dip shit, the commiecrats refused to vote for middle class tax cuts. They'd rather screw the middle class than give Trump a victory. It's that resist thing..

That is not a reason why the Conservatives made your tax cut temporary and the tax cut for the rich permanent. Why didn't they make your tax cut permanent and the cut for the wealthy temporary?

Asked and answered, and the tax breaks for wealthy individuals expire at the same time as every one else. Yep, you're not too smart.


.

The 50% tax cut for corporations is permanent

Dems will have to repeal it once they take over.....right after they tear down the wall

 

[healthmyths]

Well your statement: "Bush was handed a thriving economy " is 100% wrong!

No, you're wrong. Bush was handed an economy at full employment, an economy that even with the mild 2001 recession still grew in 2001; GDP growth in 2001 was still positive, even with 9/11 and the recession. I can't help it that you Conservatives can't manage an economy under any circumstances. Bush was handed a budget surplus, one that he could have used to retrain those thousands of out-of-work dotcom workers to rebuild our nation's power grid. But what did you guys do instead? You passed tax cuts that didn't pay for themselves, that didn't create any jobs, and that had a hand in creating the housing bubble that would burst just a few years later.

Conservative policy never works as advertised, and it's not supposed to. Conservative policy is meant to destroy the economy so they can remake it into the fascist, theocratic state they've always wanted.

Where is your proof?
Don't see ONE link to any FACTS! All those comments have LINKS! Where are YOURS???
View attachment 176572

Bush43 = Worst Modern President

Well while I'm disappointed in GWB in recent year and his support of Obama/et.al and angst about Trump here is why GWB will go down in history as one of the great presidents after
a few years recollection! People like you NEVER probably lived through these events.

 

[healthmyths]

I already told you dip shit, the commiecrats refused to vote for middle class tax cuts. They'd rather screw the middle class than give Trump a victory. It's that resist thing..

That is not a reason why the Conservatives made your tax cut temporary and the tax cut for the rich permanent. Why didn't they make your tax cut permanent and the cut for the wealthy temporary?

Asked and answered, and the tax breaks for wealthy individuals expire at the same time as every one else. Yep, you're not too smart.


.

The 50% tax cut for corporations is permanent

Dems will have to repeal it once they take over.....right after they tear down the wall

Hey DUMMY! DO YOU think these corporations paid the 39% taxes on the below?

The repatriated money could be used on share buybacks, dividends, acquisitions and capital spending.

HEY DUMMY... dividends are taxed! Acquisitions are taxed. capital spending means more money in the GDP!
ONE thing they will all NOT do that dummies like you think is bury it in the backyard on under their mattresses!

Tech companies would be the biggest beneficiaries: Apple, Microsoft and Cisco Systems alone have a total of $427 billion stored overseas.
The 50 top overseas cash holders in the S&P 500 have parked $925 billion of their cash and marketable securities outside the U.S., an increase of $118 billion since their filings one year ago.
These 50 Companies Have the Biggest Stockpiles of Cash Overseas
For example...
Apple says it will bring much of its overseas cash home under new, corporate-friendly tax law
The tech giant said it will make approximately $38 billion in tax payments — a figure that suggests the company is moving back $245 billion out of its $252.3 billion in funds stashed overseas. Apple says it will bring much of its overseas cash home under new, corporate-friendly tax law

NOW Dummy... What do you think Apple after paying $38 billion in TAXES is going to do with their $245 billion?
Between the spending plan, hiring 20,000 people, (Hey dummy... do you know how much in taxes these 20,000 jobs will pay over 5 years?)
If each hired at average salary of $60,000 that means NOW DUMMY LISTEN!... 13% in payroll taxes alone..i.e Medicare/SS payments all which are considered
Federal tax revenue...for five years... nearly $1 billion in additional tax revenue...just from Apple!
tax payments and business with U.S.-based suppliers,
Apple on Wednesday estimated it would spend $350 billion in the United States over the next five years.
Apple says it had 2,112 employees living in Santa Clara and Sunnyvale. It paid those employees $262 million.
Therefore, on average, a corporate Apple employee is making $124,053. (Its retail employees are paid less.)

 

[rightwinger]

Well your statement: "Bush was handed a thriving economy " is 100% wrong!

No, you're wrong. Bush was handed an economy at full employment, an economy that even with the mild 2001 recession still grew in 2001; GDP growth in 2001 was still positive, even with 9/11 and the recession. I can't help it that you Conservatives can't manage an economy under any circumstances. Bush was handed a budget surplus, one that he could have used to retrain those thousands of out-of-work dotcom workers to rebuild our nation's power grid. But what did you guys do instead? You passed tax cuts that didn't pay for themselves, that didn't create any jobs, and that had a hand in creating the housing bubble that would burst just a few years later.

Conservative policy never works as advertised, and it's not supposed to. Conservative policy is meant to destroy the economy so they can remake it into the fascist, theocratic state they've always wanted.

Where is your proof?
Don't see ONE link to any FACTS! All those comments have LINKS! Where are YOURS???
View attachment 176572

Bush43 = Worst Modern President

Well while I'm disappointed in GWB in recent year and his support of Obama/et.al and angst about Trump here is why GWB will go down in history as one of the great presidents after
a few years recollection! People like you NEVER probably lived through these events.

View attachment 176604

Bush 43 gave up the worst terrorist attack in history

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I already told you dip shit, the commiecrats refused to vote for middle class tax cuts. They'd rather screw the middle class than give Trump a victory. It's that resist thing..

That is not a reason why the Conservatives made your tax cut temporary and the tax cut for the rich permanent. Why didn't they make your tax cut permanent and the cut for the wealthy temporary?

Asked and answered, and the tax breaks for wealthy individuals expire at the same time as every one else. Yep, you're not too smart.


.

The 50% tax cut for corporations is permanent

Dems will have to repeal it once they take over.....right after they tear down the wall

Hey DUMMY! DO YOU think these corporations paid the 39% taxes on the below?

The repatriated money could be used on share buybacks, dividends, acquisitions and capital spending.

HEY DUMMY... dividends are taxed! Acquisitions are taxed. capital spending means more money in the GDP!
ONE thing they will all NOT do that dummies like you think is bury it in the backyard on under their mattresses!

Tech companies would be the biggest beneficiaries: Apple, Microsoft and Cisco Systems alone have a total of $427 billion stored overseas.
The 50 top overseas cash holders in the S&P 500 have parked $925 billion of their cash and marketable securities outside the U.S., an increase of $118 billion since their filings one year ago.
These 50 Companies Have the Biggest Stockpiles of Cash Overseas
For example...
Apple says it will bring much of its overseas cash home under new, corporate-friendly tax law
The tech giant said it will make approximately $38 billion in tax payments — a figure that suggests the company is moving back $245 billion out of its $252.3 billion in funds stashed overseas. Apple says it will bring much of its overseas cash home under new, corporate-friendly tax law

NOW Dummy... What do you think Apple after paying $38 billion in TAXES is going to do with their $245 billion?
Between the spending plan, hiring 20,000 people, (Hey dummy... do you know how much in taxes these 20,000 jobs will pay over 5 years?)
If each hired at average salary of $60,000 that means NOW DUMMY LISTEN!... 13% in payroll taxes alone..i.e Medicare/SS payments all which are considered
Federal tax revenue...for five years... nearly $1 billion in additional tax revenue...just from Apple!
tax payments and business with U.S.-based suppliers,
Apple on Wednesday estimated it would spend $350 billion in the United States over the next five years.
Apple says it had 2,112 employees living in Santa Clara and Sunnyvale. It paid those employees $262 million.
Therefore, on average, a corporate Apple employee is making $124,053. (Its retail employees are paid less.)

Seeing as you are the moron that thinks the guy that invaded a sovereign nation that was no threat to the US, costing the lives of thousands of US service members and the limbs and body parts of hundreds of thousands of US service members and cost the US more than 7 trillion dollars is one of the greatest presidents ever....you should never call anyone dumb, because you are the dumbest brain dead moronic partisan zealot of the bunch


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Rustic]

Well your statement: "Bush was handed a thriving economy " is 100% wrong!

No, you're wrong. Bush was handed an economy at full employment, an economy that even with the mild 2001 recession still grew in 2001; GDP growth in 2001 was still positive, even with 9/11 and the recession. I can't help it that you Conservatives can't manage an economy under any circumstances. Bush was handed a budget surplus, one that he could have used to retrain those thousands of out-of-work dotcom workers to rebuild our nation's power grid. But what did you guys do instead? You passed tax cuts that didn't pay for themselves, that didn't create any jobs, and that had a hand in creating the housing bubble that would burst just a few years later.

Conservative policy never works as advertised, and it's not supposed to. Conservative policy is meant to destroy the economy so they can remake it into the fascist, theocratic state they've always wanted.

Where is your proof?
Don't see ONE link to any FACTS! All those comments have LINKS! Where are YOURS???
View attachment 176572

Bush43 = Worst Modern President

Well while I'm disappointed in GWB in recent year and his support of Obama/et.al and angst about Trump here is why GWB will go down in history as one of the great presidents after
a few years recollection! People like you NEVER probably lived through these events.

View attachment 176604

Bush 43 gave up the worst terrorist attack in history

under Obama’s watch a lot of dead kids from shootings, because Obama brought out the worst in progressives

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Well your statement: "Bush was handed a thriving economy " is 100% wrong!

No, you're wrong. Bush was handed an economy at full employment, an economy that even with the mild 2001 recession still grew in 2001; GDP growth in 2001 was still positive, even with 9/11 and the recession. I can't help it that you Conservatives can't manage an economy under any circumstances. Bush was handed a budget surplus, one that he could have used to retrain those thousands of out-of-work dotcom workers to rebuild our nation's power grid. But what did you guys do instead? You passed tax cuts that didn't pay for themselves, that didn't create any jobs, and that had a hand in creating the housing bubble that would burst just a few years later.

Conservative policy never works as advertised, and it's not supposed to. Conservative policy is meant to destroy the economy so they can remake it into the fascist, theocratic state they've always wanted.

Where is your proof?
Don't see ONE link to any FACTS! All those comments have LINKS! Where are YOURS???
View attachment 176572

Bush43 = Worst Modern President

Well while I'm disappointed in GWB in recent year and his support of Obama/et.al and angst about Trump here is why GWB will go down in history as one of the great presidents after
a few years recollection! People like you NEVER probably lived through these events.

View attachment 176604

Bush 43 gave up the worst terrorist attack in history

And started the 3rd longest war in US history based on lies and personal grudges


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Rustic]

No, you're wrong. Bush was handed an economy at full employment, an economy that even with the mild 2001 recession still grew in 2001; GDP growth in 2001 was still positive, even with 9/11 and the recession. I can't help it that you Conservatives can't manage an economy under any circumstances. Bush was handed a budget surplus, one that he could have used to retrain those thousands of out-of-work dotcom workers to rebuild our nation's power grid. But what did you guys do instead? You passed tax cuts that didn't pay for themselves, that didn't create any jobs, and that had a hand in creating the housing bubble that would burst just a few years later.

Conservative policy never works as advertised, and it's not supposed to. Conservative policy is meant to destroy the economy so they can remake it into the fascist, theocratic state they've always wanted.

Where is your proof?
Don't see ONE link to any FACTS! All those comments have LINKS! Where are YOURS???
View attachment 176572

Bush43 = Worst Modern President

Well while I'm disappointed in GWB in recent year and his support of Obama/et.al and angst about Trump here is why GWB will go down in history as one of the great presidents after
a few years recollection! People like you NEVER probably lived through these events.

View attachment 176604

Bush 43 gave up the worst terrorist attack in history

And started the 3rd longest war in US history based on lies and personal grudges


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

What do you expect from Career politicians?

 

[The Derp]

Well, I don't know what the context of those three words were.

Sure you do. You wrote them. Are you too lazy to go back a page or two in this thread? Sure seems like it; lazy and entitled...just like every Conservative ever.

And my tax cuts? I'm not a Republican and I didn't vote for Trump. I thought the cuts were lame. Corporate taxes should be eliminated, it's double taxation. And personal rates should have been cut far deeper. I'd also slash spending, I'd cut a third of the Federal government in year one at least and keep going from there.

You say the tax cut was lame yet here you are defending it. Double taxation? Huh? I thought corporations were people, according to you guys. If corporations are people then they should be taxed like people. And why are you all about cutting taxes? Don't you understand that the more you cut in taxes, the more you spend out of pocket for things outside the consumer economy like health care and education? Do you not realize that beginning in January next year, Medicare will face cuts of at least $25B (the amount that it was supposed to be cut this year but the PayGo rules were waived by Conservatives who didn't want you to know the true cost of this scam). So I hope no one you know relies on medicare or medicaid, because they'll have to start paying much more for their health care than they did before the tax cut, thanks to the tax cut.

People who say they'd "cut" an arbitrary number from the budget are posturing jackasses. Fact is that you can't cut 1/3 of the federal budget without cutting Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. So you support cutting those programs? Of course you do, because you hate anything that benefits anyone else, even if you benefit from it too. You're just that kind of terrible person.

Trump's latest budget is $4T. It comes with a $1T deficit. Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and interest on the debt makes up about 65% of the total budget. Military spending makes up another 25%. The remaining 10% is discretionary spending. 10% of a $4T budget is $400B. So even if you cut all discretionary spending, you're still running a deficit that is larger than Obama's last one. So you haven't solved for anything, and you've laid waste to our infrastructure, to health care, to education. All so you could give some rich person you don't know and never will know, a tax break they didn't need.

Way to go.

Government should not spend over 10% of our economy, it should not redistribute wealth. It should be a referee for disputes, not a kindergarten teacher.

Well, you've proven you cannot be responsible for your actions...so that's why there needs to be a Nanny State; you don't hold yourself accountable for anything. Instead, you try to shirk responsibility, you cherry pick, and you redefine the parameters of the debate mid-stream depending on how shitty your argument is faring.

Get over yourself. No one buys your posturing.

 

[healthmyths]

No, you're wrong. Bush was handed an economy at full employment, an economy that even with the mild 2001 recession still grew in 2001; GDP growth in 2001 was still positive, even with 9/11 and the recession. I can't help it that you Conservatives can't manage an economy under any circumstances. Bush was handed a budget surplus, one that he could have used to retrain those thousands of out-of-work dotcom workers to rebuild our nation's power grid. But what did you guys do instead? You passed tax cuts that didn't pay for themselves, that didn't create any jobs, and that had a hand in creating the housing bubble that would burst just a few years later.

Conservative policy never works as advertised, and it's not supposed to. Conservative policy is meant to destroy the economy so they can remake it into the fascist, theocratic state they've always wanted.

Where is your proof?
Don't see ONE link to any FACTS! All those comments have LINKS! Where are YOURS???
View attachment 176572

Bush43 = Worst Modern President

Well while I'm disappointed in GWB in recent year and his support of Obama/et.al and angst about Trump here is why GWB will go down in history as one of the great presidents after
a few years recollection! People like you NEVER probably lived through these events.

View attachment 176604

Bush 43 gave up the worst terrorist attack in history

And started the 3rd longest war in US history based on lies and personal grudges


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Of course coming from someone who hasn't cared that according to Alan Gutmacher Institute, a leading proponent of abortion on demand,
claims that there have been more than 50 million babies have been murdered in the U.S. since Roe Vs. Wade,
what would you care about the 3,888,000 children that would have died if Saddam still in power?

In 1995 as many as 576,000 Iraqi children may have died since the end of the Persian Gulf war because of economic sanctions imposed by the Security Council, according to two scientists who surveyed the country for the Food and Agriculture Organization.
Iraq Sanctions Kill Children, U.N. Reports

PLUS here are your buddies supporting, actually calling for Saddam's removal!

Reasons for War: Things you might have forgotten about Iraq.


Pre-War Quotes from Democrats


"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons

of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."

President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"Together we must also confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons,

and the outlaw states, terrorists and organized criminals seeking to acquire them.

Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade, and much of his nation's wealth,

not on providing for the Iraqi people, but on developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons

and the missiles to deliver them." 
 President Clinton, Jan. 27, 1998.

"Fateful decisions will be made in the days and weeks ahead. At issue is nothing less than the fundamental

question of whether or not we can keep the most lethal weapons known to mankind out of the hands of an

unreconstructed tyrant and aggressor who is in the same league as the most brutal dictators of this century." 


en. Joe Biden (D, DE), Feb. 12, 1998

"It is essential that a dictator like Saddam not be allowed to evade international strictures and wield frightening weapons

of mass destruction. As long as UNSCOM is prevented from carrying out its mission, the effort to monitor Iraqi compliance

with Resolution 687 becomes a dangerous shell game. Neither the United States nor the global community can afford

to allow Saddam Hussein to continue on this path." 
 Sen. Tom Daschle (D, SD), Feb. 12, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of

a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." 
 Madeleine Albright, Feb. 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." 


Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb. 18, 1998.

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions

(including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's

refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." 


Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998. "As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and

biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the

development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has

made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." 
 Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." 


Madeleine Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time,

Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs

continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is

doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States

and our allies." 
 Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region.

He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of

delivering them." 
 Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored away secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." 


Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will

continue for as long as Saddam is in power." 
 Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." 


Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some

stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his

chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." 


Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"My position is very clear: The time has come for decisive action to eliminate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's

weapons of mass destruction. I'm a co-sponsor of the bipartisan resolution that's presently under consideration in the Senate.

Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave threat to America and our allies..." 
 John Edwards (D, NC), Oct. 7, 2002


"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm

Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real

and grave threat to our security." 
 Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons

and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years .... We also should remember we have always

underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." 


Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002.

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution

that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity.

This he has refused to do." 
 Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild

his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also

given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked,

Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying

to develop nuclear weapons." 
 Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct. 10, 2002.

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a

number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. 


Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ....

He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ...

And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of

mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...." 


Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

 

[The Derp]

Hey you should talk! NOT ONE substantiation of any of your totally subjective comments!

What comments are those? Do you not know what "subjective" means? It's not subjective to say that revenues grow at a slower rate after tax cuts than after tax increases. That's a fact, proven with math and using revenue data from the Treasury department.

See you have to show your sources, your links because someone who uses a idiotic masked character as an avatar must be a real juvenile. Get some proof for your dumb as comments!

I do show my sources, happily. All you do is cut and paste memes, many of which are unsourced themselves, and think that because you plagairize someone else's work, that means your work is sourced. It's not.

 

[The Derp]

Thank you, I will accept your advice. You are an angry, unhappy person who is clearly incapable of engaging in a intellectual debate. That is why you so often resort to cursing and name calling. It happens every time you are confronted with a point you have not considered. You should try to like yourself, because I don’t think you’ll every change and grow. Later!

No, what's going on here is that you're an intellectual fraud, who can't bear to admit you're not as intuitive as you think, who is embarrassed at being conned, and who can't overcome the egomania.

So after spreading bullshit lies about fiscal policy, you have the nerve to try and admonish me for getting feisty with you?

Get over yourself, snowflake.