+1

Yes. As Willy Wonka and the Bolsheviks are wont to say, "You gotta go forward to go back."

The world is going forward.

The Republicans should not win anymore elections. They should sit down and let the Democratic Party lead us out of the mess of the Bush Years.

 

Some of the Democrats here seem to be unwilling to welcome me into their tent.

You seem like an open, good American.

Have you read my list? It's on the previous page, toward the bottom. It lists all the provisions that the Republicans should step aside and let us do.

 

Bryan 'the summer of 69in' Adams

 

Okay, I just read the language, and it is indeed applicable to income earned on or after 1/1/2012. So in that sense it IS retroactive. I'm pretty sure almost all income tax legislation works that way, though.

 

Yep.

Say what you will, he looked great in bluejeans.

Full disclosure: I saw him in concert. I was like twelve. Flashed the stage. Not that anyone noticed. This was before FB, and I didn't have much to show.

 

The Massachusetts legislature tried to tax us retroactively. Back when Mitt Romney was governor. We fought it, he championed it, and he helped us to get it repealed.

Not that this means there is a single solitary thing to admire about the filthy Mormon.

I was happy about the repeal of the retro provision at the time, because I was just starting out in my business, and it would have crushed me.

I was very selfish then.

I would not be that way today. I would set my own petty interests aside and consider the common good.

I deeply admire the people of California for fucking themselves deep in the ass.

 

Here is my Democratic Party to-do list again, since we're sort of losing sight of it. Bump!

 

Oh you got adam and the ants over the pond did you? Would a retroactive apology from me, leader of britain, on behalf of british music suffice?

 

You can't have it both ways, Clarise. I've listened to conservatives endlessly prattle on about California's gargantuan deficit, and now that Jerry Brown is doing something to put the state on a sound fiscal course, conservatives are again prattling on about how unfair it is.

You know what? Suck it.

Oh, wait...that particular taunt is for Joe Dirty.

 

I am not from California. Even if I were a conservative teabagger (which I am not), I wouldn't care.

I have also read that Governor Brown is close to attaining supermajorities in the House and Senate of California, which means he won't even have to put future tax increases to a vote.

That way, he will be able to proceed forward with the transformation of California even faster.

You are undoubtedly immensely pleased. I know I would be. I mean, look at all the benefits. George Clooney lives like, hundreds of miles from you, right? He lives thousands of miles from me.

 

I wish he lived even closer, 'cuz my pussy gets dripping wet just thinking about fucking his brains out, then sucking his spermy cock back to rigid hardness, and fucking him all over again.

 

San Francisco is cool. They have trams and an island prison. What could be better.:rose:

 

Well....a former island prison. I mean the prison is former, not the island.

 

Yeah. (sigh)

See, we have a lot more common ground than you're willing to admit, but I sense a thaw.

Back to my list. Too much all at once, right? Too many moving parts, huh?

Well, I think we can do all of this. And if it looks hard, or impossible, or fraught with peril, that's nothing we can't solve.

For instance, we can outlaw failure.

Hold on. I'm serious.

See, it would work sort of like our plan to rescue the Washington Post, and the New York Times, and the Chicago Tribune, and the Boston Globe. The people or our cities need to be properly educated, or none of the rest can work. So, for the common good, it is expedient that NPR nationalize the papers.

Well, we can set up additional rescues, similar to GM, Evergreen Solar, Tesla Motors, Fisker, and A123 Battery.

All we have to do is make it against the law for corporations to fail. And we can set up provisions that ensure they will not fail.

If countries have a problem with the erasure of our 16 trillion dollar debt, we can issue directives that make it unlawful for them to protest or seek redress.

And so on.

If you're feeling any sequeamishness about this, I would suggest you are just too backward-thinking. You have to think forward.

 

There is no forgiving Adam Ant. But after the Churchill thing, let's call it even.

 

I will call it even if you tell me what the thing is that meat loaf wont do for love.

 

Hah! Question... can I answer this without Google?? Okay... I'll take a shot: '69' with one of JoeDirty's dickgirls?

(Chill, JD, you know I luv ya, even though you're a teabagger)

 

So I've been working on a laptop beside this one, and I have a radio going nearby, and a local talkshow host is wringing his hands like a sad-sack betrayed teabagger, wondering why 3 million Republicans stayed home.

That's not my point.

The point is, the teabagger spin machine talking head says, "Well at least all these papers that have been spiralling toward insolvency are going out of business for the next round, because their ad revenue is going to dry up."

Of course we disagree, right? Because we're in the know.

But someone called in and said, "The mainstream media companies are too big to fail."

The talking head said, "Oh, no they're not. The Boston Globe is losing millions of dollars a week, and they'll be the first to go. The first of many."

But he missed the caller's point, right? The papers are too big to fail. And therefore they will not fail. Because they will be nationalized. For the common good.

I'm getting pretty good at being a Democrat, huh?

 

If you ask me, the campaign for the 2014 midterm elections starts NOW. No more gridlocked Congress. Democrats and Republicans must work with each other and they all must work with President Obama. We cannot deal with the $16 Trillion national debt with spending cuts alone. We must raise revenue. That being said a jobs bill that pays back in savings on unemployment and increased taxes from newly employed people is a good investment. Every spending bill isn't bad and every spending cut isn't good. The economy is already showing signs of recovery - new houses are being built again, the private sector has been adding jobs for 30 months and the stock market is 60% higher than when Obama first took office. What they shouldn't do is enact cuts that will send us back into a recession. I really believe they can do this. They did it during the Clinton administration.

 

Bullshit tenguy. Its somewhere between $13 and $16 Tillion

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-09-14/tallying-the-full-cost-of-the-financial-crisis

http://www.scribd.com/doc/60553686/GAO-Fed-Investigation#outer_page_144

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/...l-reserve-handed-to-the-too-big-to-fail-banks

Now if you've got sources to debunk those figures lets see them.

You are a true snake in the grass tenguy and the way you slither from side to side and back and forth in these exchanges proves that beyond reasonable doubt.

You're the one who touted the "free market" knowing full well no such thing exists now and never fucking did.

You just throw up this mythical right wing talking points knowing full well there ain't not and never has been any such thing.

Only because you're cornered on that point but keep trying to slither away from what you really said just like the snake in the grass you really are.

You're the one who started out asking which was worse government or big business and when its pointed out to you it was the greed and corruption of big business that caused the global economic collapse and the US Great Recession you start slithering from side to side.

Now claiming that we are not regulating the big businesses and instead putting regulations of small businesses which is half way across the grass from your original question.

All the more reason we need a strong federal government, with strong federal regulations, and enough regulators to enforce them.

What government official is responsible for shipping Salmonella contamination you slippery snake?