“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#17729 Aug 18, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Anyone running for office can keep their sexual lives secret as they run. I really do not care what they do in the bedroom. If Larry Craig, Mark Foley,Ted Haggard(not elected I know),or Bob Allen, want to bang dudes, I don't care.
We know republicans are going to fight against homosexual rights even if they are homosexuals themselves. We know Democrats are going to fight for gay rights no matter what their sexuality is. So why does it matter what sexuality they are?
Well, it is not a choice of lifestyle I agree with.

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#17730 Aug 18, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>It would be nice to see just what loopholes he used. I hear one is for his horses. Seventy seven thousand dollar deduction. Is that really needed?
I think some loopholes are warranted. Some push people to put their money in good places. Insurance deductions are great and warranted. Deductions for charities are warranted. I do not think deductions should be given for religious payments/donations. Religion is not charity.
But if people really want the debt reduced, unwarranted deductions need to be cut. Mitts returns will put the focus on this.
Anyone who does not want Mitt to release them must not really be serious about the debt.
So, as long as they get your approval or the Democrat approval, they are acceptable loopholes?

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#17731 Aug 18, 2012
waco1909 wrote:
<quoted text> Read the last sentence of my post to silver.....you don't have to worry about me agreeing or disagreeing with silver.silver is what he is.At first I had trouble...understanding a man so unlike myself.And of course I have no understanding of him or his life.Different life experiences.Totally.But I'll say this he raided his family with his wifes help and raised their standard of living.I respect that.Do I expect him to respect me or anyone like me? Not at all.A lot of shockingly different people on this forum have raised their families doing the best they can.Bacon you have and so has Arnold and Mike too has done his best.I don't know what to say.silver makes me wonder though.His posts seem way different.Don't tell me i'm the only one who has noticed that.
Waco, no one is questioning the family life of these people, at least that I have noticed. What we debate here, or should, is their political views.
And part of Silvers political views involve some intense racism. How are you not offended by this? No, he does not have to respect you, nor do you have to respect him. Just take his views for what they are.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#17732 Aug 18, 2012
Silvercoastcorks wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, it is not a choice of lifestyle I agree with.
Ok, but what does that have to do with their being a politician?
I do not agree with someone watching someone having sex with animals, but I do not think it will involve their political agendas.
I have shown how no matter the sexual preference, the agendas of democrats and republicans do not change. So why does it matter? Can you not answer a simple question with a answer that actually answers the question?
You seem really worried about peoples personal lives yet oddly, you do not care to see what deductions Mitt Romney has taken advantage of. One could be to a gay rights group for all you know.

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#17733 Aug 18, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>It is no surprise you have few friends. I am a bit surprised you fight them with fists and all. I probably should not be surprised though.
I guess you cannot see how contradictory your statement is. If you fight your friends, clearly you have some ideological differences. They may not be political, but you have differences.
You see, we can be friends with those of other political ideals because we know everyone is different in some way or another. So why limit your friendship on general politics? Now if someone is a racist or something, I can see not being their friend, but that is not general politics.
And you admit to being racist, so your perception is likely flawed on the amount of accusations of racism.
But sure, some do cry racism when it is not warranted.Humans are flawed. The day Utopia comes......Utopia will never come.
In fact, it is you and your attitude of racism that makes people think republicans are racist. You are fulfilling the stereotype. If you do not like being called a racist, or the party being called racist, stop being racist. Then you can whine about it legitimately.
I take it you are an only child Mike. As far as the racist crap, blah blah blah. Again, I am prejudice but I don't speak for the entire Republican Party. I walk to the beat of my own drum and that drum is of conservative values, which obviously, do not align with you liberal ideas. I am ok with us not agreeing or seeing eye to eye. But it is not ok for the Dems to castigate "hate group" comments or "racist" comments because someone does not agree with their beliefs. You say I am full of shit, well back at ya buddy.

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#17734 Aug 18, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>I have a question, can I get an answer? Who is asking for equal outcomes?
You are Mike. You asked for Ammendment One to not be passed and it was. You ask for no racial discrimination yet I have shown reverse racism examples time and time again.

Equal outcomes. Another example is Obamacare, or the Affordable health care act.

“physics is your friend”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#17735 Aug 18, 2012
Mike I think you know my views on racism.I'm not sure silver is a racist or a segregationist I don't even know if the terms are alike.When he called my friend a half-breed I pretty much lost it.Jesus Christ is the Son of Man and God.Does that make HIM a halfbreed? OBVIOUSLY i'm asking the wrong guy that as you are an atheist .I was just wondering.

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#17736 Aug 18, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Ok, but what does that have to do with their being a politician?
I do not agree with someone watching someone having sex with animals, but I do not think it will involve their political agendas.
I have shown how no matter the sexual preference, the agendas of democrats and republicans do not change. So why does it matter? Can you not answer a simple question with a answer that actually answers the question?
You seem really worried about peoples personal lives yet oddly, you do not care to see what deductions Mitt Romney has taken advantage of. One could be to a gay rights group for all you know.
It is a representation of the people for the people by the people that I do not agree with. Seriously man, if we need to rehash the gay debate this weekend, fire away.

Procreation factor alone is a reason why the gay choice lifestyle is not acceptable. Yes, there are traditional couples that require outside assistance, but ALL gay couples require assistance.

So what happens when there are no more surrogates and your kids world is comprised of all gay people? Your kids die off. Humanity dies off. And yes, that will probably eventually happen but at least give your kids the chance to make that determination for themselves. Again, I only speculate because I am not an anthropologist or bioengineer.

I alreay know your posture on the religious implications.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#17737 Aug 18, 2012
Silvercoastcorks wrote:
<quoted text>
Middle class tax rates fall between 33-38%. 14%-18% for rich and so on. I can not quote the entire tax code, but I will try relate some of what I know as examples only.
I would speculate, as a bar manager, you would make roughly 40 to 50k a year. So I will take the high end to error on side of caution. If you make $50,000 gross and your tax rate, will say is 35%. Then you would end up paying 17.5k in taxes while taking home roughly 32.5k.$32,500 to pay mortgages, light bills etc, etc.
Now, if I make 500k a year and pay 16% in taxes. I pay 80k in taxes and take home 420k. While I payed a lower rate, I still payed in more tax wise.
This example is also why a flat tax rate wouldn't work either. Because a flat tax rate could very well end up being detrimental to those who make less.
Again, I have no idea what you make and have no desire to know. Just throwing out numbers to show comparisons.
Can you not see how someone only making fifty grand a year would be hurt by paying 17 grand in taxes but someone making 500k a year would not be equally in hurt by paying 80k? One cannot pay much for a mortgage on 32k take-home. But I cannot see why taking home 420k is going to hurt anyone paying a mortgage.

Everything is relative. Democrats are not asking for a flat tax, republicans are.

“physics is your friend”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#17738 Aug 18, 2012
Silvercoastcorks please define what the hell you mean EXACTLY when you say you are"prejudiced". The term is not precise.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#17739 Aug 18, 2012
waco1909 wrote:
Mike I think you know my views on racism.I'm not sure silver is a racist or a segregationist I don't even know if the terms are alike.When he called my friend a half-breed I pretty much lost it.Jesus Christ is the Son of Man and God.Does that make HIM a halfbreed? OBVIOUSLY i'm asking the wrong guy that as you are an atheist .I was just wondering.
Evidently you missed many of Silvers posts. He is openly racist. Why would he embrace racism if he were not a racist?
He claimed he would never hire a black person and wished to have no black persons in his neighborhood. What more do you need to know?
If he were not so blatantly racist, I likely would not be so short with him. But the racism changes everything in my book.

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#17740 Aug 18, 2012
http://politix.topix.com/homepage/1807-woman-...

More stellar democrat equality values...

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#17741 Aug 18, 2012
Silvercoastcorks wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a representation of the people for the people by the people that I do not agree with. Seriously man, if we need to rehash the gay debate this weekend, fire away.
Procreation factor alone is a reason why the gay choice lifestyle is not acceptable. Yes, there are traditional couples that require outside assistance, but ALL gay couples require assistance.
So what happens when there are no more surrogates and your kids world is comprised of all gay people? Your kids die off. Humanity dies off. And yes, that will probably eventually happen but at least give your kids the chance to make that determination for themselves. Again, I only speculate because I am not an anthropologist or bioengineer.
I alreay know your posture on the religious implications.
No, it will not eventually happen because everyone is not gay. Your logic fails massively. Who cares if they procreate? Not everyone who gets elected procreates. Again, how does this affect their politics? It changes nothing.
The world is in a over population era. We have no need for all to procreate at the time. So just why are you so worried about everyone procreating? Does procreating make for better politicians? If so, then only vote for parents. Quite simple. No need to know the sexual preference.
Seven billion humans on earth and rising. No worries dude.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#17742 Aug 18, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>It would be nice to see just what loopholes he used. I hear one is for his horses. Seventy seven thousand dollar deduction. Is that really needed?
I think some loopholes are warranted. Some push people to put their money in good places. Insurance deductions are great and warranted. Deductions for charities are warranted. I do not think deductions should be given for religious payments/donations. Religion is not charity.
But if people really want the debt reduced, unwarranted deductions need to be cut. Mitts returns will put the focus on this.
Anyone who does not want Mitt to release them must not really be serious about the debt.
Absolute Mike, no faith based questions here. For the sake of argument, have you ever thought that for at least 10+ years Mitt Romney has had political aspirations and with these political aspirations he will be under bigtime scrutiny. Do you seriously think he cheated on his taxes when he knew that's the first stumbling block to moving on up the food chain of politics? I'm not saying if he paid ONLY 13% or 14%(whichever number you guys are arguing about), but he apparently paid what he was required to pay according to the IRS. His tax returns will probably show that he paid only what he had to pay. Whether any of us find it offensive that compared to his income, the taxes he paid may look pathetic, it's not illegal to pay only what you're required to. Do you really think that people run around and go "OMG, I'm sending an extra couple of thousands or millions because I feel I haven't paid enough even though the law says I have." That's why I say the IRS needs to be overhauled.

Now getting to leaking his federal income taxes would be a federal offense. We don't have time to list everyone elected to or has worked for the federal government that has/is/or will be serving prison time for a federal offense. For you to think that would keep someone from leaking that information is preciously naive, but there's always someone that will do anything for the right price. I'd just assume see somebody leak his income tax information than I would the WH leaking conidential military information that could kill our men and women in the military. Don't say this hasn't happened, people on both sides of the aisle have called the WH out on this right to the POTUS. So, if people don't care if leaking information kills somebody, leaking income tax information is small time and again, everybody has a price.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#17743 Aug 18, 2012
Silvercoastcorks wrote:
<quoted text>
You are Mike. You asked for Ammendment One to not be passed and it was. You ask for no racial discrimination yet I have shown reverse racism examples time and time again.
Equal outcomes. Another example is Obamacare, or the Affordable health care act.
Oh, so equal health care is the outcome you speak of?

I ask for no racism. You are a racist who openly advocates hiring on race values. This is why the government forces people to hire blacks. Because you refuse to do so willingly. Twist it any way you wish. All I see from you is some perverted twist on the idea of discrimination.

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#17744 Aug 18, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Can you not see how someone only making fifty grand a year would be hurt by paying 17 grand in taxes but someone making 500k a year would not be equally in hurt by paying 80k? One cannot pay much for a mortgage on 32k take-home. But I cannot see why taking home 420k is going to hurt anyone paying a mortgage.
Everything is relative. Democrats are not asking for a flat tax, republicans are.
I see the detriment to both sides. But they have the same opportunity to change that as you or I do. Also how is it benefical to penalize the guy making 500k a year more in taxes? Because they earn more? How is that fair? I think, since you are the bar manager, you should be required to tip out way more than wait staff or bar tenders to your doorman or security staff. That seems fair to me.

There is that key word again, opportunity. Maybe those that are only taking home 32k a year should manage their wealth better or determine what priorities are important and which ones are not.

Everything is relative.

“Breaking the spell ”

Since: Dec 10

of the puppet master

#17745 Aug 18, 2012
Silvercoastcorks wrote:
<quoted text>
I take it you are an only child Mike. As far as the racist crap, blah blah blah. Again, I am prejudice but I don't speak for the entire Republican Party. I walk to the beat of my own drum and that drum is of conservative values, which obviously, do not align with you liberal ideas. I am ok with us not agreeing or seeing eye to eye. But it is not ok for the Dems to castigate "hate group" comments or "racist" comments because someone does not agree with their beliefs. You say I am full of shit, well back at ya buddy.
I have agreed it is not right to cast racist condemnation when not warranted. But I think you fail to see, your voice and many racists like yourself are a huge part of your party. It is clear to see. You being racist is certainly not helping your argument. So when someone sees a policy that comes from you guys that so much as appears racist, it is called as such. Not everything in life is fair. But again, I am not condoning it, just pointing out reality.

You can point to reverse racism all you wish, but no one is going to take a racist seriously on the subject. That is reality, fair or not. To expect otherwise is lacking understanding of the world and human nature.

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#17746 Aug 18, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>No, it will not eventually happen because everyone is not gay. Your logic fails massively. Who cares if they procreate? Not everyone who gets elected procreates. Again, how does this affect their politics? It changes nothing.
The world is in a over population era. We have no need for all to procreate at the time. So just why are you so worried about everyone procreating? Does procreating make for better politicians? If so, then only vote for parents. Quite simple. No need to know the sexual preference.
Seven billion humans on earth and rising. No worries dude.
So, by your logic, breeding should be regulated? Doesn't China do that? Didn't Russia do that? Didn't the Japs do that?

It is the only thing of a family unit that isn't dictated by law, tax or regulation. The only reason I could see, for a family to not exercise their "right" procreate is either by choice or fiscal reasons.

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#17747 Aug 18, 2012
Mike Duquette wrote:
<quoted text>Oh, so equal health care is the outcome you speak of?
I ask for no racism. You are a racist who openly advocates hiring on race values. This is why the government forces people to hire blacks. Because you refuse to do so willingly. Twist it any way you wish. All I see from you is some perverted twist on the idea of discrimination.
Twist it? Well back at ya big guy.

I have a clear conscious and sleep like a baby.

“physics is your friend”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#17748 Aug 18, 2012
What a night.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Salisbury Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
United House of Prayer for All People: Bishop's... (Apr '08) Tue Mr Sir 8,518
Girlfriend, family of deceased Dallas Ebola pat... Oct 19 Latin king idiot 1
Wholesale Medical Marijuana supplier Oct 12 fast supplier 1
Asheville's transgender community speaks (Apr '08) Oct 3 RJC 780
places to rent Oct 2 Renee 1
Bottom Dollar Foods CLOSING ALL STORES Oct 1 Struthes Ohio 5
Hidden Cove Apartments Sep 23 Curious 1
Salisbury Dating
Find my Match

Salisbury Jobs

Salisbury People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Salisbury News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Salisbury

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]