Obama's REAL Religion

[rightwinger]

wow is there anything you will post thats your own?

No, there isn't

She got through college on cut and paste

Originality is not her forte

 

[NYcarbineer]

Tea party Texas Republican Ted Cruz's father fought alongside Fidel Castro.

Maybe PC will google somebody to explain how this fits into her crackpot theory.

 

[PoliticalChic]

wow is there anything you will post thats your own?

No, there isn't

She got through college on cut and paste

Originality is not her forte

Translation: you can't contend, and you can't compete.

That's OK...you were probably better in the old days.

(I'm just being kind.)

 

[del]

wow is there anything you will post thats your own?

Bulletin: Every post with my avi is my own.

sure it is, and your avi is you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Obviously I see no connection between the President and the man who had little influence on his upbringing

Maybe you can explain it

Through skillful machinations, I was able to get my hands on the (apocryphal) “Liberal Libretto”, as ratified by Saul Alinsky.
Actually, I pointed over a libs shoulder and shouted ‘watch out’ and grabbed the book.

Seems you get full credit for rule #6b.

6. Claim to misunderstand, obfuscate, deflect and change the subject, and, if all else fails, allege that you misspoke.
a. Remember, left-wingers may make a ‘mistake,’ for right-wingers, it is a lie!
b. When relating a series of events that lead to a conclusion, if it is a right-wing conclusion, we must never see the connection! Never, ever, be able to connect the dots!
c. Any exposure of detrimental information must be referred to as either ‘fear-tactics,’ or ‘red-baiting.’
d. No matter how strong the opposition argument or data, always respond with “you falsely claimed…” or “I exposed your lies…” or “I destroyed your argument…” or 'that's just your opinion' etc.



Hooray!!!!



wingy gets party creds!!!!


Carry on: Left-right, left-right, left-right......

Once again, your academics fail

What you replied with had nothing to do with the topic at hand. I know this shit got you through college, but it doesn't sell here

Stay on topic......namely, you have no point

You're ♩ ♪ ♫ ♬ ♭ fibbing again....

 

[francoHFW]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[GoneBezerk]

Obamination's religion is a collection of religions and political ideas he has been exposed to since his childhood.

He was a muslim growing up overseas then in the USA exposed to secularism, Christianity, socialism, and black liberation theology...so he has taken pieces of each one of them to form his own relgion of the one named Barrack Obama.

He doesn't like to offend islam, he can put on an act around Christians, and he believes in the "share the wealth" of secularism, socialism and black liberation theology. He can smooze and suck up to most crowds as an actor with his teleprompter, he is the perfect stealth politician to dupe the American public.....see 2016.

 

[Sunni Man]

Why should I pay more for taxes on my labor, than a man that gets income from an investment?

Mainly, because he already paid taxes on the money he earned before he invested it.

 

[Plasmaball]

wow is there anything you will post thats your own?

Bulletin: Every post with my avi is my own.

no, it really isnt.

 

[JoeB131]

My father was an industrial chemist - I am not.

Your post, sweet darling, is crap.

I note that you didn't specify any specific errors....

...was that so that I couldn't take you to the woodshed?

The only error is that you're crazy and seriously need to be medicated...

I'm wondering how many of the nutbags on this board are going to be needing institutionalization when Obama wins an easy second term.

 

[Sunni Man]

Why all of the personal attacks on PoliticalChic and none on the OP ??

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Sorry but religious beliefs are irrelevant to me.

 

[AmyNation]

wow is there anything you will post thats your own?

no, there isn't

she got through college on cut and paste

originality is not her forte

+1

 

[rightwinger]

wow is there anything you will post thats your own?

No, there isn't

She got through college on cut and paste

Originality is not her forte

Translation: you can't contend, and you can't compete.

That's OK...you were probably better in the old days.

(I'm just being kind.)

Your attempts at trolling used to be so much more effective.

In recent months you have gotten more lazy

 

[Jackson]

1. In 1965, Barack Obama, Sr. wrote in the “East Africa Journal” the following: “We need…to eliminate power structures that have been built through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall control a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now.” How? Well, the state can take over large segments of the “commercial” or private sector. And, he said, there is no reason to worry about economic freedom or individual rights “We have to look at priorities in terms of what is good for society and on this basis we may find it necessary to force people to do things they would not do otherwise.”


2. In an article from 1965 entitled “Problems Facing Our Socialism,” Barack Obama’s father stated: Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed. . . It is a fallacy to say there is a limit (to tax rates), and it is a fallacy to rely mainly on individual free enterprise to get the savings. Barack Obama Sr. "Tax 100% of income." Like Father, Like Son? | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Revolution



3. Let’s examine the kind of thinking of the Left, the kind that supports “there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income…” Economist Arthur Laffer states that there are two levels of taxation that produce identical levels of revenue, both producing zero. The first case is obvious: a government tax rate of zero…it takes no money. A 100% tax rate produces the same result: taking everything gives absolutely no incentive to work.

a. Is it possible that there is a gene for Leftist thinking???? And our President inherited it???

4. No? Well, then…how does Mr. Obama, junior justify doubling the capital gains and dividend tax rate to 30 percent from 15 percent today? The motivation, it seems, is the “basic issue of tax fairness:” This is a recurrent theme for Obama. In a 2008 debate between Obama and Hillary Clinton, ABC’s Charles Gibson asked Obama why he would support raising capital-gains taxes given the historical record of government’s losing net revenue as a result. “Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital-gains tax for purposes of fairness,” Obama replied. This moment revealed that Obama isn’t simply or even primarily interested in raising taxes for economic reasons (e.g., raising revenues or spurring growth). He sees taxes through a moral prism, as an instrument to advance “fairness,” which he takes to mean leveling higher taxes on wealthy Americans in order to decrease income inequality. Liberals, Conservatives and Tax Fairness « Commentary Magazine


a. Liberal folks regularly complain about religion in the public arena, carping about turning our nation into a theocracy….but without an economic basis for taxation, it is no more than a religious belief to set policy on such a basis.





But Obama, sr and jr represent the socialist religion that is undergoing a 'reformation' elsewhere....



5. "The EU's welfare states are going broke, and the knives are out for their budgets and the politicians who have supported the EU project. Voters to the north are electing anti-EU candidates who are lecturing about "responsibility" and "thriftiness" to profligate neighbors such as the "lazy" Greeks, Spanish and Portuguese, as German Chancellor Angela Merkel described her southern partners in May.

European Council President Herman Van Rompuy summed up Europe's situation: "We can't finance our social model anymore."
In Europe, economic meltdown tears at unity


Our President is not smart enough to catch what is blowin' in the wind.

Without getting into how this pertains to the president..

1. Correct. Each and every time you have power and wealth in the hands of a few..revolution breaks out.

2. That's correct. Our own constitution has no limit on tax rates.

3. You guys support 0 or close to 0 tax rates. Tax rates are the lowest in this country right now then they have been in many years. Where's the benefit? And by benefit..I ain't talking about the Koch Brothers.

4. "Capital gains" is a euphemism for money for nothing. And it relies on government infrastructure to make it possible. So? You like the money for nothing thing? Vote Republican".

5. You guys hold a religious litmus test to each and every candidate. That's not very constitutional of yas..

Done..without the cut and paste..

Capital gains is putting your money at risk and being rewarded by it by taxing it lower if a profit is made. If we didn't have investors, just where would we be today?

 

[AmyNation]

1. In 1965, Barack Obama, Sr. wrote in the “East Africa Journal” the following: “We need…to eliminate power structures that have been built through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall control a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now.” How? Well, the state can take over large segments of the “commercial” or private sector. And, he said, there is no reason to worry about economic freedom or individual rights “We have to look at priorities in terms of what is good for society and on this basis we may find it necessary to force people to do things they would not do otherwise.”


2. In an article from 1965 entitled “Problems Facing Our Socialism,” Barack Obama’s father stated: Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed. . . It is a fallacy to say there is a limit (to tax rates), and it is a fallacy to rely mainly on individual free enterprise to get the savings. Barack Obama Sr. "Tax 100% of income." Like Father, Like Son? | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Revolution



3. Let’s examine the kind of thinking of the Left, the kind that supports “there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income…” Economist Arthur Laffer states that there are two levels of taxation that produce identical levels of revenue, both producing zero. The first case is obvious: a government tax rate of zero…it takes no money. A 100% tax rate produces the same result: taking everything gives absolutely no incentive to work.

a. Is it possible that there is a gene for Leftist thinking???? And our President inherited it???

4. No? Well, then…how does Mr. Obama, junior justify doubling the capital gains and dividend tax rate to 30 percent from 15 percent today? The motivation, it seems, is the “basic issue of tax fairness:” This is a recurrent theme for Obama. In a 2008 debate between Obama and Hillary Clinton, ABC’s Charles Gibson asked Obama why he would support raising capital-gains taxes given the historical record of government’s losing net revenue as a result. “Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital-gains tax for purposes of fairness,” Obama replied. This moment revealed that Obama isn’t simply or even primarily interested in raising taxes for economic reasons (e.g., raising revenues or spurring growth). He sees taxes through a moral prism, as an instrument to advance “fairness,” which he takes to mean leveling higher taxes on wealthy Americans in order to decrease income inequality. Liberals, Conservatives and Tax Fairness « Commentary Magazine


a. Liberal folks regularly complain about religion in the public arena, carping about turning our nation into a theocracy….but without an economic basis for taxation, it is no more than a religious belief to set policy on such a basis.





But Obama, sr and jr represent the socialist religion that is undergoing a 'reformation' elsewhere....



5. "The EU's welfare states are going broke, and the knives are out for their budgets and the politicians who have supported the EU project. Voters to the north are electing anti-EU candidates who are lecturing about "responsibility" and "thriftiness" to profligate neighbors such as the "lazy" Greeks, Spanish and Portuguese, as German Chancellor Angela Merkel described her southern partners in May.

European Council President Herman Van Rompuy summed up Europe's situation: "We can't finance our social model anymore."
In Europe, economic meltdown tears at unity


Our President is not smart enough to catch what is blowin' in the wind.

Without getting into how this pertains to the president..

1. Correct. Each and every time you have power and wealth in the hands of a few..revolution breaks out.

2. That's correct. Our own constitution has no limit on tax rates.

3. You guys support 0 or close to 0 tax rates. Tax rates are the lowest in this country right now then they have been in many years. Where's the benefit? And by benefit..I ain't talking about the Koch Brothers.

4. "Capital gains" is a euphemism for money for nothing. And it relies on government infrastructure to make it possible. So? You like the money for nothing thing? Vote Republican".

5. You guys hold a religious litmus test to each and every candidate. That's not very constitutional of yas..

Done..without the cut and paste..

Capital gains is putting your money at risk and being rewarded by it by taxing it lower if a profit is made. If we didn't have investors, just where would we be today?

I don't think money managers should get the 15%.

 

[BillyV]

...Oh the irony. Let it be noted that you completely avoided answering my question.

Let's try this: Answer the question for a change. Why should our tax code favor financial capital over human capital?

Post #10, dim-wit.

No, I already debunked that nonsense. People working is advantageous to the economy. People passing around savings does not benefit the economy.

So try answering the question this time, "dim-wit" lest we begin to think you"ceased your education at the fifth grade level": Why should our tax code favor financial capital over human capital?

The tax code does not favor financial capital over human capital, but if you think about it for a minute, where do you think your typical employer gets the money to start his business, make it grow, and hire those employees to be "advantageous to the economy"?

Reagan raised capital gains taxes, so he had no religion either, or no religion, whatever mythical metaphoric analagy you want.

Why should I pay more for taxes on my labor, than a man that gets income from an investment?

The man that made the investment already paid taxes on the money that he is investing so he gets taxed twice.

Correct.

A lot of people don't seem to know this. Or, more likely, they don't care.

That's not actually true. A dollar invested in a stock is never taxed again; when you sell the stock, your original investment is subtracted from the price you received for it and you only pay tax on the difference (the "capital gain"). The double taxation comes in when you receive a dividend. You see, the corporation first pays tax on the profit. Then they pay the dividend to the stockholder and get no tax deduction for paying the dividend, yet the stockholder has to pay income tax on it. That's double tax, and is often why a company's capital structure leans more heavily to debt, since the tax code allows a deduction for the interest paid to a debtholder. As a result, the company can borrow more with the same amount of profit because the government is not getting a double share. PoliticalChic laid out these extra levels of taxation perfectly well in her referenced earlier post, and was entirely correct.

 

[RDD_1210]

Reagan raised capital gains taxes, so he had no religion either, or no religion, whatever mythical metaphoric analagy you want.



Why should I pay more for taxes on my labor, than a man that gets income from an investment?

The man that made the investment already paid taxes on the money that he is investing so he gets taxed twice.

Correct.

A lot of people don't seem to know this. Or, more likely, they don't care.

.

Incorrect. Taxes are only on the gains, not the principle.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why all of the personal attacks on PoliticalChic and none on the OP ??

The OP was comprehensively demolished in about 20 words in one of the first posts. As is usually the case with PC threads.

 

[Conservadude]

Obama worships himself.