JFK wouldn't be a Democrap today

[GoneBezerk]

Asswipe....Bobby Kennedy was in on spying on MLK Jr, with JFK's blessing since they needed to make sure he wasn't some communist radical riling up southern blacks.

JFK wouldn't be associated with scum like you, Sharpton, Jackson, etc because using the RACE card today is below him.

The rest of your rant shows you should be locked in a rubber room.

JFK cut taxes to stimulate the economy.....liberals ignore that FACT.

JFK cut taxes because we were entering a surplus. Douchebags ignore that FACT.

JFK investigated MLK Jr for his activities and would never support Jackson/Sharpton today......liberals ignore that FACT.

J Edgar Hoover was the one investigating MLK Jr. He also blackmailed leaders. You're a stupid fuck.

JFK got us tangled in a bad war in Vietnam (worse than Bush's Iraq)......liberals ignore that FACT.

It was Ike who chose not to abide by the Paris Treaty, and allow free elections in Vietnam that was the prime cause of the Vietnam Civil War. You're really one stupid fuck.

JFK would not belong to the socialist, anti-military Democrap party of today....that is a FACT.

JFK would be among the first to say you like sucking sucking your own asshole.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And the ultra right and libertard clown show stumbles along for the Board's entertainment.

 

[SniperFire]

And the ultra right and libertard clown show stumbles along for the Board's entertainment.

And you continue to ignore the facts and duck simple questions which destroy your libtard meme, basing your entire argument on a hearty ' NUH UHN!!"

LOL

 

[NYcarbineer]

This rightwing myth gets revived on about a quarterly basis. It never gets less stupid.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You have given no "facts" that supports your contention that JFK would have anything to do with the GOP today. He would be thrilled with the GOP, because it would guarantee him the elimination of the two-term limiit and a Democratic presidency forever.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Absolutely no proof that JFK was a neo-conservative, none, nada.

Kennedy's pro-labor views alone would disqualify him from the current GOP.

 

[SniperFire]

You have given no "facts" that supports your contention that JFK would have anything to do with the GOP today. He would be thrilled with the GOP, because it would guarantee him the elimination of the two-term limiit and a Democratic presidency forever.

(watch this duck of a very simple and fair question)

Would you say that supply-side economics is generally associated with neo-conservatism? In fact, is it not a defining characteristic?

Would you agree that JFK was a strong believer in supply-side economics, as directly and thouroughly evidenced from the televised link I provided upstream of JFK giving a speech on the subject?

 

[SniperFire]

Too. Easy. Sometimes.


LOL

 

[NYcarbineer]

JFK would be more of a democrat today because he would have nothing in common with the GOP of today.

You continue to make baseless assertions. This is because the truth rips you a new sphincter.

Could there could be a better description of trickle-down economics than neocon JFK's famous economic idiom that ' a rising tide lifts all boats'?

Let's put that quote in context. Here's where JFK used it:

"These projects produce wealth, they bring industry, they bring jobs, and the wealth they bring brings wealth to other sections of the United States. This State had about 200,000 cars in 1929. It has a million cars now. They weren't built in this State. They were built in Detroit. As this State's income rises, so does the income of Michigan. As the income of Michigan rises, so does the income of the United States. A rising tide lifts all the boats and as Arkansas becomes more prosperous so does the United States...."

What project is he defending with the quote?

lol, a federally funded dam project in Arkansas, begun under FDR, that finally got the TAX MONEY to finish it in 1963.

JFK is justifying the spending of federal tax money on infrastructure, on the grounds that THAT is the source of the rising tide that lifts all boats.

John F. Kennedy: Remarks in Heber Springs, Arkansas, at the Dedication of Greers Ferry Dam.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nah, nah, nah . . . don't do that. SniperFire will pizzle on hisself.

 

[SniperFire]

JFK would be more of a democrat today because he would have nothing in common with the GOP of today.

You continue to make baseless assertions. This is because the truth rips you a new sphincter.

Could there could be a better description of trickle-down economics than neocon JFK's famous economic idiom that ' a rising tide lifts all boats'?

Let's put that quote in context. Here's where JFK used it:

"These projects produce wealth, they bring industry, they bring jobs, and the wealth they bring brings wealth to other sections of the United States. This State had about 200,000 cars in 1929. It has a million cars now. They weren't built in this State. They were built in Detroit. As this State's income rises, so does the income of Michigan. As the income of Michigan rises, so does the income of the United States. A rising tide lifts all the boats and as Arkansas becomes more prosperous so does the United States...."

What project is he defending with the quote?

lol, a federally funded dam project in Arkansas, begun under FDR, that finally got the TAX MONEY to finish it in 1963.

JFK is justifying the spending of federal tax money on infrastructure, on the grounds that THAT is the source of the rising tide that lifts all boats.

John F. Kennedy: Remarks in Heber Springs, Arkansas, at the Dedication of Greers Ferry Dam.

This is fun!

Is it your contention that JFK was not a STRONG proponent of supply-side economics?

[youtube]aEdXrfIMdiU[/youtube]

 

[SniperFire]

“Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate.”


– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963

 

[JakeStarkey]

JFK was not a Republican and he would have had nothing to do with the ultra right and the libertards today. To suggest so, without any credible evidence (and none has been presented here), reflects an immature intellect.

If ever a thread condemned ultra right conservatism and libertarianism as unworthy of Americans and their culture, SniperFire et al have provided it.

The libertard and ultra right clown show is boring now.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Put the entire speech online so that it can be read in context.

This is demonstrative of libertard lameness.

“Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate.”


– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963

 

[SniperFire]

You have given no "facts" that supports your contention that JFK would have anything to do with the GOP today. He would be thrilled with the GOP, because it would guarantee him the elimination of the two-term limiit and a Democratic presidency forever.

(watch this duck of a very simple and fair question)

Would you say that supply-side economics is generally associated with neo-conservatism? In fact, is it not a defining characteristic?

Would you agree that JFK was a strong believer in supply-side economics, as directly and thouroughly evidenced from the televised link I provided upstream of JFK giving a speech on the subject?

All should note for the third time, Fakey simply refuses to say as to whether or not JFK was a strong and faithful believer in perhaps THE most defining characteristic of a dreaded NEOCON - supply-side economics.

Laughing, hard!

 

[JakeStarkey]

For the fourth time, SniperFire has failed to give any objective, credible evidence for his misdefintion of terms and his botched revision of history. We are waiting for a definiton of neo-conservatism and its history. SF = fail, again.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You have given no "facts" that supports your contention that JFK would have anything to do with the GOP today. He would be thrilled with the GOP, because it would guarantee him the elimination of the two-term limiit and a Democratic presidency forever.

(watch this duck of a very simple and fair question)

Would you say that supply-side economics is generally associated with neo-conservatism? In fact, is it not a defining characteristic?

Would you agree that JFK was a strong believer in supply-side economics, as directly and thouroughly evidenced from the televised link I provided upstream of JFK giving a speech on the subject?

You're attempting to use one isolated policy item and multiply it into an overall description of JFK's politics.

Bill Clinton's first major act was the passage of NAFTA, with more Republican votes than Democrats,

I hardly think that makes the case that Clinton is really a Republican.

 

[SniperFire]

For the fourth time, SniperFire has failed to give any objective, credible evidence for his misdefintion of terms and his botched revision of history. We are waiting for a definiton of neo-conservatism and its history.

So you are saying JFK was not a strong proponent of supply-side economics, then?

 

[SniperFire]

You have given no "facts" that supports your contention that JFK would have anything to do with the GOP today. He would be thrilled with the GOP, because it would guarantee him the elimination of the two-term limiit and a Democratic presidency forever.

(watch this duck of a very simple and fair question)

Would you say that supply-side economics is generally associated with neo-conservatism? In fact, is it not a defining characteristic?

Would you agree that JFK was a strong believer in supply-side economics, as directly and thouroughly evidenced from the televised link I provided upstream of JFK giving a speech on the subject?

You're attempting to use one isolated policy item and multiply it into an overall description of JFK's politics.

Bill Clinton's first major act was the passage of NAFTA, with more Republican votes than Democrats,

I hardly think that makes the case that Clinton is really a Republican.

We can talk about his other policy items. Right now, I am just asking if JFK a strong supply-sider, or not?

Is the question too difficult?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Nah, nah, nah . . . don't do that. SniperFire will pizzle on hisself.

No, he'll just ignore it because it's irrefutable fact that destroys his stupid argument.