:insane: That's a laugh. You haven't been paying attention to what I've been saying here at all. I know nothing of the kind. If you think that you know something, then spell it out. You are not making a lot of sense here. :huh: Insults are a poor substitute for an argument. :dis: Well, then thank you for your guess.
Nope. Because I wouldn't tax the necessities of life at a high rate. So everything you wrote is BS. This is over simplified (so that SabanFan can understand :wink, but: Food, gasoline, etc - very low tax rate. Alchohol, cigarettes, Disney World, private schools - higher tax rate. Huge homes, huge yachts, luxury cars - highest tax rate. You choose your poison. Liberals don't like this plan because it gives people choices. Liberals are Anti-choice (one of the greatest political ironies of our time!). :lol:
It's an art, really. You should admire it and be grateful you're here to witness it! :wink: Who luv's ya red?
So he's saying that if we strive to make all people have equal wealth, then we will hurt the economy as a whole. You then come back and blast him for being anti constitutional and not caring about equality when you know that was not the equality the forefather's were talking about. They are talking about equal opportunity, not equal wealth, posessions, incomes etc. You then take what I say, cut it in half, and make it look like I conceded to you. Here's what I said.... and here's how you quoted me.... like I said, I'm amazed that with all of your intelligence, you are stooping to this.
Let me fix what I said. I think I was banging too hard on my keyboard. But to turn this into an argument against LSUAthletic's position against narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor is taking the constitution out of context and you know it. That is, his argument was against trying to make everyone equal in terms of wealth. You then throw back at him that the constitution gave us the freedom of equality when you know that is not the equality the writer's were talking about. They were talking about equal opportunity.
Re: President Obama forces GM boss Rick Wagoner to step down BUT...has he asked Geithner to step down yet? :nope:
It's a debate, laddie. We can make any point, stand on any soapbox, or draw any parallel that we want to. What are you afraid of hearing? LSUAthletics seems to understand my responses to his questions. Why are you trying to personalize it?
Keep ignoring the point I've made to you in 4 seperate posts. Don't dispute it, don't say I misinterpreted, just keep ignoring it.
