Most people don’t pay cash for cars, they finance them. Their tax refund may be enough for a down payment, but the sales and other taxes are not paid on the down payment but rather on the entire price of the vehicle. Sales and other taxes and fees frequently run over 11% of the price of the vehicle. If someone gets a $3000 tax refund and then uses it to buy a $40,000 vehicle (say a Suburban), they would be paying over $4000 in taxes, the salesman would be paying $500 in income taxes on the commission, the dealership would be paying taxes on the profit, the transporter would be paying income taxes on his fees, the manufacturer would be paying taxes on the profit from the sale of the vehicle, and the assembly line worker would be paying taxes on his income from building it. If you were the one collecting the money, which would you rather have, the initial $3000 or the $5500+ from all of the ancillary taxes? Now imagine if that tax refund had been $300,000 instead of only $3,000. Instead of buying a car, the taxpayer builds an addition to his factory and hires 10 employees who then produce products which are then sold and produce even more tax revenues for the government through ancillary taxes. Not only that, but the employees would also be paying taxes and buying things on which taxes were being collected as well. That folks is why LOWER tax RATES PRODUCE HIGHER tax REVENUES.

Now don’t all of those arguments sound @#$%^&* ridiculous?

Let me show you what you’ve been voting for and perhaps you’ll see the light.

Increased minimum wages result in increased business cost for unskilled labor resulting in the unskilled labor being fired for not producing enough value to offset their cost. You would’n pay $25 for a $5 item would you? Neither will businesses.

Hence increased unemployment AND higher inflation.

As more businesses fail and people become unable to pay their bills, lending will become more risky hence higher interest rates.

Seeing as Democrats haven’t seen a government handout program that they didn’t like, despite fewer people being able to pay into the tax coffers, they will spend even more like a bunch of drunken sailors. Therefore an ever increasing deficit.

When haven’t the Democrats tried to allow the UN to dictate our foreign policy? We went into Vietnam to try and save France’s ass because Vietnam had been a french colony.

The Democrats are trying to force a retreat (a withdrawing troops while in contact with the enemy is a retreat, NOT a redeployment. Moving the 4th ID to Ft Hood from Ft Carson was a redeployment.) and lose the war just like they did in 1975 from Vietnam. You’re probably too young to remember watching US Marines having to kick friendly Vietnamese civilians off the skids of the last helicopter as it lifted off from the roof of the embassy in what was then called Saigon. I’m not. I remember it all too well.

The Democratic administrations have consistently reduced military budgets, cancelled weapons contracts, reduced or eliminated retention bonuses and instituted recruiting caps that have left the military weakened EVERYTIME they’ve had the chance in the last 40 years.

Global warming has not been proven to be even remotely caused by human activity. The eruption of Mt St Helens put more CO2 and other pollutants into the air in a few hours than the entire industrial revolution. The eruption on Krakatoa in the 1880s was even larger. The current temperatures are not as hot as during either the Climatic Optimum or the Little Climatic Optimum. The Little Climatic Optimum occurred less than 1000 years ago when the closest thing on the road to an SUV was a horse drawn cart. Since the Little Climatic Optimum, the earth has actually gone through a 300+ year long mini ice age. At our current rate of increase, we’ll get to the temperatures experienced during the Little Climatic Optimum in about 150 – 200 years.

The Kyoto Protocols have so damaged the economy of many European countries, that many economists are saying that if they don’t withdraw from the protocols, their economies could collapse. The whole sending of money to third world dictators to purchase “carbon credits” have left without the money necessary to upgrade their equipment to be able to compete with China and India who are exempt from Kyoto. Should we follow their example?

Democrats have consistently argued against stiffer or mandatory sentencing guidelines for violent or repeat offenders. Seeing as 75+% of the violent crime in this country is committed by only 25% of the criminals, doesn’t it make sense that when we catch them, we should put them away until they are no longer a threat to the law abiding citizen? Do I really need to remind you of the Democratic stance on the Death Penalty? Perhaps if Ted Bundy had been executed after the first time he was arrested, another 20+ women would still be alive. He damn well hasn’t killed anyone since he was executed.

Democrats have consistently championed gun control as a means of crime control. This is patently false and has been proven so by all scientifically repeatable studies. Even when the Carter administration commissioned two anti gun professors to do a study of the effects of gun control laws on criminal behavior, the professors changed their opinions at the end of the study. The Anti Gun professors tried an unique approach. They actually interviewed over 25,000 CRIMINALS to find out how gun laws effected them. They were stunned by the results. Imagine their surprise at finding out that convicted felons, who have been ineligible to legally purchase firearms since 1968, would either buy them illegally or steal them. When faced with the absurd proposition that they wouldn’t be able to get a handgun, most replied that they’d simply saw the barrel and stock off of a rifle or shotgun. Imagine that, career criminals would do something illegal. Additionally, John Lott has did research for his book “More Guns, Less Crime” that NOONE has been able to prove inaccurate or incorrect, nor has his methodology been proven to be anything but rock solid.

As for the comment about the Democrats trying to give criminals a safe work environment by pushing for gun control, criminals have flat out stated that they prefer unarmed victims. A 13 yr old gang member who was involved in the carjacking, robbery and murder of a couple of German tourists in Florida said that the gang intentionally targeted rental cars because they knew the tourists would be unarmed and therefore unable to protect themselves effectively. From the mouthes of babes. That is one reason why rental car companies in Florida stopped putting rental company license plate frames on their vehicles.

If anyone takes exception to my remarks, please feel free to look them up. They’re all based on historical fact, not some liberal hysteria.

Technically, from the Klintonian persepctive, his statement was accurate! You see, she had sex with him! Not the other way around!

It’s all according to the rules of Klinon-speak. Careful parsing, technical corectness. The meaning of “is”…

Absolutely right! I agree, bring it on. Let the chips fall where they may. A massive housecleaning may be just what is needed to break up the corrupt, established mini-Empires in Congress.

“No wonder the right is already rattling around in the dustbin of history.”

I remember just a very few years ago when the right was saying this about the left. It only demonstrates a short sighted view and ignorance of history.

Personally, I think both sides are pretty much idiots at this point. You all act like idiots, post commentary like idiots, make idiotic claims and do really, really stupid things. (of course there are exceptions that are few and far between).

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a ducks…

“However: if you open up that can of worms you open it on both sides of the aisle.”

I would welcome that. Personally, I am for independant over sight of Congressional ethics. Except for the slightest trafic tickets, Congress members should be expelled for criminal convictions and suspend for indictments. 99% of them would be gone.

I say flush the toilet- those turds are stinking up the place.

As for Bush lying to get us into war, you have that wrong, and that lie has been debunked over and over again. It is you kool-aid drinkers who are trying to lie us into a defeat when the victory is in reach.

It wasn’t a BJ that people were angry about, it was the fact that he lied to a federal judge. Either you know that and chose to ignore it, or you are just ignorant.