Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 9, 2016, 8:10 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Lottery bill could limit winner's take

Topic closed. 101 replies. Last post 6 years ago by rdgrnr.

Page 6 of 7
51
PrintE-mailLink
rdgrnr's avatar - walt
Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
United States
Member #73904
April 28, 2009
14903 Posts
Offline
Posted: October 26, 2010, 10:34 am - IP Logged

Saying that Republicans tax and spend is patently ridiculous. They may spend like drunken sailors, but as good, patriotic Americans, they fund much of their spending by borrowing the money. That makes it much easier for them to keep a straight face when they claim they're reducing your taxes and that  they're better for you than "tax and spend Democrats". In reality, they're like somebody who buys a car with 5 year loan and claims they're saving money  because the monthly payment is a few bucks less than if they took a 4 year loan. Sure, the monthly bill is a bit smaller, but the final cost is far more because it costs more when you borrow the money.

As far as who actually spends more money, there are a million ways to spin the numbers, but comparing spending to GDP gives an honest picture of what's happening. Here's a graph from USspending.com that shows spending since 1950, which let's us compare spending under various administrations: http://tinyurl.com/2wtwgrf  Here's what that shows us:

- Eisenhower: sharp increase, followed by brief decline, and another increase. Finishes about 20% higher than at start of administration.
- JFK, LBJ: short increase, followed by decline, ending with an increase. Finishes about 7% higher than at start.
- Nixon, Ford: increase, decline, increase. Finishes about 13% higher than at start.
- Carter: 3 years of decline followed by one year increase. Finishes about 2% lower than at start.
- Reagan: starts with about an 11% increase, followed by decline, increase, decline, and ends with an increase. Finishes about 3% higher than at start.
- Bush 1: Continues Reagan increase for 2 years (+ 6.6%), then declines for 2 years. Finishes about 4% higher than at start.
- Clinton: 1 year decline and 1 year increase foillowed by 5 years of decline, finishing with an increase. Finishes about  6.6% lower than at start.
- Bush 2: 2 year increase, fairly steady for 4 years, finishing with  2 years of sharp increase. Finishes nearly 25% higher than at start.
Obama: increase so far, finishing about 4% higher than at start.

Summarizing, there have been only two administrations that saw overall decreases in spending, which were Carter and Clinton. The average change for all Democratic administrations was an increase of less than 1%. Every Republican administration presided over individual increases, with an average increase under Republican administrations of 13%.

How was all that spending paid for? I don't have info going back that far, but the Heritage Foundation has it for Clinton and Bush 2
( http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/06/federal-spending-by-the-numbers-2010 ). Under Clinton the total spending (in inflation-adjusted dollars) was $17.322 trillion. Clinton eliminated the deficit he inherited from Bush 1, and had a surplus in the last 4 years of his administration. Overall, 97% of Clinton's spending was actually paid for with revenue that was collected. Total spending under Bush 2 was $21.618 trillion (in the same inflation-adjusted dollars), but slightly less than 90% of it was actually paid for with revenue collected.

Democrats tax and spend. Republicans borrow, and spend more.

"As far as who actually spends more money, there are a million ways to spin the numbers..."

 

Precisely.

And that post was one of them.


                                             
                     
                                         

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                   

"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

                                                                                            --Edmund Burke

 

 

    susscs's avatar - hani
    Michigan
    United States
    Member #89371
    April 6, 2010
    191 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: October 26, 2010, 11:54 am - IP Logged

    As someone from Michigan this proposed Law is _________ fill in the blank we all have deferring opinions, my take, reform welfare there are people out there abusing it and there are people out there who need it but can't get it. The consultations tell you to get the most help you need to get divorced so that the woman and children will get benefits, (no joke) just get divorce live together but not on paper and she'll get every benefit they have. There is something very wrong with the system and it needs to be fixed for the good of all people. This law just puts more money into the state funds and they sure don’t seem to know the best way to use it.

      tntea's avatar - Lottery-059.jpg

      United States
      Member #5344
      June 30, 2004
      23641 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: October 26, 2010, 4:55 pm - IP Logged

      If one wins a big one,  take all that the system has provided in the past and let them have what is left.

       

      If they have lived off the system for years, then pay up.. and then live off the remaining.... Why not pay back so the system can keep helping those who aren't working and have nothing..

           OLD/Vtrac   Lottery Bible         Double Warnings      Thumbs Up TN F34/F44

        Avatar

        United States
        Member #12694
        March 20, 2005
        17 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: October 26, 2010, 6:28 pm - IP Logged

        This lawmakers should spend more of their valuables time,  figuring out how to create JOBS, so people will get off welfare.Then they would not have to worry about how people spend their money..

          hmyeahwhatever's avatar - shapes swish.jpg
          Ottawa, Illinois
          United States
          Member #97305
          September 14, 2010
          142 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: October 28, 2010, 6:53 pm - IP Logged

          Yep...agree on reform part...there is huge problem with welfare system and yes they should reform it! (work off all that payraises they've gotten over past few years). Now....gov. telling you that you can't have money you win....hehe....sounds like communism. Let's say high hypothetical situation....you are single mother with 3 children, who goes to school  and work to support her family (because children's father just doesn't). So..one day she stand in line in store and guy in front of her buys her a ticket, because she has most beautiful eyes he ever seen. Just one ticket!!! Pays cash, no name, no  id on ticket. Gives to her and oh my she wins!!! (agree it's a very slim chance, but we can't really say it won't happen, right). Oh, boy! Real blessing, because she needs it so bad! Now she can actually afford to go to school full time, finish it, get great job that pays well enough to support her family and get off of that afing welfare!!! Later, she claims her prize and what are you know, sweet government  tells her all she can get is $ 600,  well, because she gets a medicaid for her children. But great news for her, she still eligible for medicaid benefits! Oh, my! She tries to tell them she did not spend that dollar out of  her gov. help money, but law is law, right?

          There are three types of people in this world: those who make things happen, those who watch things happen and those who wonder what happened.

            Avatar
            NY
            United States
            Member #23835
            October 16, 2005
            3474 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: October 29, 2010, 7:33 pm - IP Logged

            "FYI, a candy bar can be bought with food stamps."

            That you can potentially spend all of your food stamps on snack size packages of Skittles is just one of the many reasons the system needs to be reformed.

            "You say you don't have a problem with getting assistance when someone is down on their luck, yet you jumped on me without even KNOWING my situation."

            That you're not a chronic welfare recipient is great, but I don't need to know your whole situation. You've already told us enough for the discussion at hand.

            "Do you know what it's like to talk to a foodstamp counselor and be embarrassed beyond belief?"

            No, but I'm not telling anyone I need help feeding my family while I can still manage to buy lottery tickets. That's  the  relevant point. If you can afford to buy lottery tickets you don't need (as much) taxpayer money to buy food.

            As long as you take that money and still find money for the tickets you're buying those tickets with my money. Of course if you win a jackpot with a ticket that I paid for you're going to be perfectly willing to give me back my $1, right?

              Avatar
              NY
              United States
              Member #23835
              October 16, 2005
              3474 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: October 29, 2010, 7:43 pm - IP Logged

              "As far as who actually spends more money, there are a million ways to spin the numbers..."

               

              Precisely.

              And that post was one of them.

              Feel free to offer your methodology for an even comparison. I'm sure you'd love to claim that republicans cut spending by x%, and you can find statistics that make that claim, but statistics also say that as an average American you've only got one testicle.  Spending as a percentage of GDP is about as good a metric as there is since it accounts for inflation, economic conditions, and other things that skew simpler numbers.

              I'm sure you'd love to claim that republicans cut taxes by x%, and again, you can find truthful statistics that claim that, but cutting taxes by x% and borrowing more than x%, or shifting the burden elsewhere is smoke and mirrors, not a real cut in the cost to taxpayers.

                rdgrnr's avatar - walt
                Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
                United States
                Member #73904
                April 28, 2009
                14903 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: October 29, 2010, 11:38 pm - IP Logged

                Feel free to offer your methodology for an even comparison. I'm sure you'd love to claim that republicans cut spending by x%, and you can find statistics that make that claim, but statistics also say that as an average American you've only got one testicle.  Spending as a percentage of GDP is about as good a metric as there is since it accounts for inflation, economic conditions, and other things that skew simpler numbers.

                I'm sure you'd love to claim that republicans cut taxes by x%, and again, you can find truthful statistics that claim that, but cutting taxes by x% and borrowing more than x%, or shifting the burden elsewhere is smoke and mirrors, not a real cut in the cost to taxpayers.

                I think you've broached this subject before so let me be crystal clear this time: My testicles and their number are my business and I shan't be discussing them with you.

                Two things here Floyd, one of the last things in the world I would want to be is an apologist for Republican spending and you would have to beinsane  to defend Obama's spending.

                Let's vote em all out.


                                                             
                                     
                                                         

                 

                 

                 

                 

                                                                                                                   

                "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

                                                                                                            --Edmund Burke

                 

                 

                  Avatar
                  Georgia
                  United States
                  Member #79361
                  August 30, 2009
                  93 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: November 1, 2010, 10:08 am - IP Logged

                  Are they serious?  I sure hope this doesn't pass.  Did it ever occur to these lawmakers that these people are playing to get OFF welfare.  SMH

                  I agree.  It is counterproductive. 

                   

                  One person in Michigan got the 140 Mil MM.  That will do much to help the person's family and the area's economy.

                    Avatar
                    New Member
                    Ontario
                    Canada
                    Member #99841
                    November 1, 2010
                    1 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: November 1, 2010, 4:12 pm - IP Logged

                    This is a great example of how government reacts to the people, they never apply this logic to themselves they fail the people and succed it taking away your rights and suppress you!

                    Do you know how far this "logic" can go?

                    If people live in welfair spend there money on lotto tickets instead of food then they lose out, thats fine, but you can't screw everyone over because of a few nuts who spend 50 bucks a week on it, if someone wins, then they should be able to get out of the gutter and pay there TAX on the money and end up paying back to the government WAY more then they took, it would make up for what the government pays many people in a life time if thats the case but the government is THERE for that purpose, they are for the people, it makes no logical sense to say if you win up to any amount that its ok and then say a larger amount is NOT ok, either it is ok or its not, that makes no sense, its a grab for money, you all are being manipulated!

                    Keeping the poor even more poor is the goal here, if someone feels the investment into a ticket is the way to go (that is what it really is its an investment) they WHO's business is it what they do with there money?

                    They are givin money to work with what they got, its how everything works, you don't act and treat people like its a police state, if the lotto thing goes nuts then just cap much money a month can be bought in tickets and when it comes to food stamps just say its only applicable to food (from what im reading thats not the case)

                    But the cost of lotto tickets are MUCH less then going to see a movie whcih can cost up to 20 bucks if you go with your husban or wife, maybe they should bar people from going there, how about we just go all the way and lock these people up and feed them nothing but slop in a bucket... no they are human beings, they have rights and suppressing the people even futher will not make things better, it always hurts everyone, this kind of logic AlwAYS being used is wrong, its like the drug companys, they want to drug everyone, did you know they suggest giving viagra to teenage boys who were healthy and had no negative physical problems at all?

                    This is all abotu manipulation, they want to do something, they make an excuse and then abuse it all to hell!

                    SO whats next, if your on welfare you can't invest? do you have to be a smart investor? is that it, everyone HAS to be a success in everyones eyes? thats unrealistic, basically because these poor people aren't winning they are losers who should be suppress in what they do, its there money, let they do as they want its THERE LIVES stop trying to FRICKEN CONTROL EVERYTHING!!

                    They don't get "to much" the poor are VERY poor, no one can get around that, there lives aren't better then the average joes, so if anyone is acting bitter saying to themselves "oh they have a free ride" its a crappy ride its why they are so desprate to play the lotto, PLUS they get something out of it, its fun, would you rather them sell there stuff or food for drugs? some don't do that, but if you start controlling people then you know what this is also discrimination, saying they aren't good enough or smart enough to make there own choises, just because a few are really bad, you can't go around and point fingers at everyone, thats the same kinda logic they use for racism.

                    You wanna know what you can do about it?

                    Maybe help create jobs and help business's get off the ground, here is a major problem, do you know how much it cost to just open a business? You have to pay so many fee's its rediculous!

                    Finally lets just put all the cards on the table. Before we look at gambling which can be bad but CAN be VERY GOOD! if you win you are set for life! you pay tax's your giving back... but before you even go there, why don't they look at the real costs and issues like enormous medical bills which cause the average American huge amounts of money, look at the cost of a bed, where is that money going? into the pockets of the super weathy who are manipulting people, this is a solid fact! Look at the cigarette costs over a month, look at the costs of excess alcohol, these are 100% destructive in these people's lives, but are these being adressed? no they are pounding at the one place where it might actually have a positive impact on these people.

                    If you say they have no power, you are teaching them they have no power there for they will do NOTHING and be NOTHING, if you control them like animals they will ACT like ANIMALS!

                    Let they do what they want with what they are givin, if they lose out in the end, they LEARNED A LESSON!

                    STOP TRYING TO CONTROL PEOPLE GOVERNMENT, ITS NOT YOUR PLACE!

                      TheOtherOne's avatar - Lottery-027.jpg
                      Nashville, TN
                      United States
                      Member #86739
                      February 9, 2010
                      483 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: November 1, 2010, 5:22 pm - IP Logged

                      I'm not saying I agree or disagree with this legislation, but to those who say "subtract the welfare payouts from a prize (if they win one)", that does not solve the problem they are trying to address.  It does not discourage welfare recipients from playing, because the amount of welfare payout removed from a jackpot is negligible, compared to the overall jackpot.  Meanwhile, the chances of actually winning the jackpot is very small, and the probability that the welfare money is being spent on losing lottery tickets is much higher.

                      One thing I do agree with, as far as this legislation is concerned, is that people should NEVER gamble with money that they cannot safely afford to lose.  The lottery is entertainment, not an investment.

                      On the other hand, I am very much against government intrusion.  I do not believe the government has any right to tell people not to gamble.  That includes over the Internet.  (Just like how the government should not take from one group of people and give it to another.)

                      Perhaps the politicians should just grow a backbone and reform the welfare system, rather than tinkering with the lottery.

                      I think Todd's last comment hits it on the head.

                      This is wild too, considering a woman was just in a TN gas station in front of me the other day and bought 2 coke's with a 'government card of some sort'. She was asking if it could still be used in TN as she was from MICHIGAN. The clerk said yes it is gov't so it can be used anywhere.

                       

                      She then paid with cigarrettes and lottery with her cash on the side.

                       

                      She was not your 'typical' image of someone on welfare but I have heard of others spending HOURS at the store playing lottery with what is obviously welfare cash.

                      Pi$$es me off!

                        Avatar
                        NY
                        United States
                        Member #23835
                        October 16, 2005
                        3474 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: November 1, 2010, 8:50 pm - IP Logged

                        I think you've broached this subject before so let me be crystal clear this time: My testicles and their number are my business and I shan't be discussing them with you.

                        Two things here Floyd, one of the last things in the world I would want to be is an apologist for Republican spending and you would have to beinsane  to defend Obama's spending.

                        Let's vote em all out.

                        Don't worry, I'm not actually  interested in how many testicles (or ovaries, which are also statistically one to a customer) you might have. That's simply a great example of how easy it is to lie with statistics.

                        You certainly don't need to apologize for Republican spending, since I don't blame that on you. Still, if you're going to claim that I'm wrong in saying that, by any reasonable standard of comparison, Republicans have spent more than Democrats over the past 60 years the only honest thing to do is offer at least a bit more evidence than saying "did not."

                        I can actually agree with the basic idea of that last idea except for the problem of who we'd be voting in. Among other problems, history has largely shown that *all* of the people who have run for office have claimed they're going to cut spending and/or lower our taxes. The only exception I can think of off the top of my head is Walter Mondale. He said that both he and Reagan would raise our taxes. Since Mondale wasn't offered the chance I can't be sure what he would have done, but he was certainly right about Reagan. History has also shown that virtually all politicians have then gone on to raise our taxes. I'm sure there are a few more isolated examples, but the only ones that come to mind would be Carter and Clinton, as I pointed out in my previous post. History also shows that far too many of the candidates who pledge to do things for me have been far more interested in their own welfare.

                          rdgrnr's avatar - walt
                          Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
                          United States
                          Member #73904
                          April 28, 2009
                          14903 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: November 2, 2010, 12:29 am - IP Logged

                          Don't worry, I'm not actually  interested in how many testicles (or ovaries, which are also statistically one to a customer) you might have. That's simply a great example of how easy it is to lie with statistics.

                          You certainly don't need to apologize for Republican spending, since I don't blame that on you. Still, if you're going to claim that I'm wrong in saying that, by any reasonable standard of comparison, Republicans have spent more than Democrats over the past 60 years the only honest thing to do is offer at least a bit more evidence than saying "did not."

                          I can actually agree with the basic idea of that last idea except for the problem of who we'd be voting in. Among other problems, history has largely shown that *all* of the people who have run for office have claimed they're going to cut spending and/or lower our taxes. The only exception I can think of off the top of my head is Walter Mondale. He said that both he and Reagan would raise our taxes. Since Mondale wasn't offered the chance I can't be sure what he would have done, but he was certainly right about Reagan. History has also shown that virtually all politicians have then gone on to raise our taxes. I'm sure there are a few more isolated examples, but the only ones that come to mind would be Carter and Clinton, as I pointed out in my previous post. History also shows that far too many of the candidates who pledge to do things for me have been far more interested in their own welfare.

                          As you have stated before: "There are a million ways to spin the numbers." I agree. You can go google any of this stuff and get facts and figures supporting any position you would like to take on any issue.  Most of the blatant liars are on the left however. That's where most of the seething hatred lies. Some of their stuff is just downright vicious.

                          Once again though I'll tell you, I'm not a Republican so don't expect me to defend their spending.

                          I liked Ronald Reagan though. And a large measure of his spending was to rebuild the military which Jimmy Carter and the democrats had all but dismantled, hoping that if we disarmed, the Soviet Union would too. Nope, doesn't work that way. President Reagan made us by far the greatest superpower of all time again with a 600 ship navy to boot. The Soviet Union collapsed under the pressure of trying to compete.  Democrats always starve the military and hope the tyrants of the world will have mercy on us. Then the Republicans have to vastly increase expenditures to return the military to it's former strength. It's a vicious cycle.   

                          Harry Reid is a typical democrat weasel. He actually said "we lost" the war in Iraq and it was time to bring the troops home. Then Obama goes around the world apologizing for every bad thing that has ever happened in history and saying it was our fault and we're sorry and started bowing down to tyrants.

                          That's the kind of stuff that makes me not like democrats.

                          And they lie all the time. They have to lie or nobody would vote for them.

                          And democrat men are always weasel-like, like Harry Reid. You know, the limp-wristed, effeminate, cowardly, backstabbing type. I don't like people like that speaking for me or leading my country.

                          And democrat women are always ignorant loudmouths for some reason.

                          And do I have to name all the weirdo groups that support the democrats?

                          My parents were democrats but they wouldn't recognize the party today now that it's been taken over by the weirdos and the communists and the hate groups.

                          So no, I have no interest in defending who spent less or who spent more way back when. I'm more interested in the whole new dynamic of your party (who now openly joins communists in marches and rallies) trying to destroy our republic and how patriotic Americans are going to try and begin to stop them today.

                          I consider anyone who really knows what's going on and still votes democrat to be a traitor. Our White House is now full of them and the America-haters in Congress and elsewhere have slithered out of their holes to show their true colors and it is the duty of Americans not to give them aid or comfort. 

                          Your party has the "stupid vote" wrapped up as they have for years by lying to them and keeping them bought off and I can't call stupid people traitors when they're just being stupid but anybody with a brain who votes democrat is a traitor to our nation in my opinion. Nobody with half a brain is stupid enough to vote democrat unless they agree with and support the campaign of Obama and his democrats and communists to destroy this country.

                          You can throw your lot in with the traitors if you like but there's a lot of us out here that still love this country and we'll do whatever it takes to keep it.

                          Believe that.

                          My condolences to you and your party on the election results later on today.

                          America wins - you lose.

                          Thank God.


                                                                       
                                               
                                                                   

                           

                           

                           

                           

                                                                                                                             

                          "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

                                                                                                                      --Edmund Burke

                           

                           

                            truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
                            Michigan
                            United States
                            Member #22395
                            September 24, 2005
                            1583 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: November 2, 2010, 1:52 am - IP Logged

                            As you have stated before: "There are a million ways to spin the numbers." I agree. You can go google any of this stuff and get facts and figures supporting any position you would like to take on any issue.  Most of the blatant liars are on the left however. That's where most of the seething hatred lies. Some of their stuff is just downright vicious.

                            Once again though I'll tell you, I'm not a Republican so don't expect me to defend their spending.

                            I liked Ronald Reagan though. And a large measure of his spending was to rebuild the military which Jimmy Carter and the democrats had all but dismantled, hoping that if we disarmed, the Soviet Union would too. Nope, doesn't work that way. President Reagan made us by far the greatest superpower of all time again with a 600 ship navy to boot. The Soviet Union collapsed under the pressure of trying to compete.  Democrats always starve the military and hope the tyrants of the world will have mercy on us. Then the Republicans have to vastly increase expenditures to return the military to it's former strength. It's a vicious cycle.   

                            Harry Reid is a typical democrat weasel. He actually said "we lost" the war in Iraq and it was time to bring the troops home. Then Obama goes around the world apologizing for every bad thing that has ever happened in history and saying it was our fault and we're sorry and started bowing down to tyrants.

                            That's the kind of stuff that makes me not like democrats.

                            And they lie all the time. They have to lie or nobody would vote for them.

                            And democrat men are always weasel-like, like Harry Reid. You know, the limp-wristed, effeminate, cowardly, backstabbing type. I don't like people like that speaking for me or leading my country.

                            And democrat women are always ignorant loudmouths for some reason.

                            And do I have to name all the weirdo groups that support the democrats?

                            My parents were democrats but they wouldn't recognize the party today now that it's been taken over by the weirdos and the communists and the hate groups.

                            So no, I have no interest in defending who spent less or who spent more way back when. I'm more interested in the whole new dynamic of your party (who now openly joins communists in marches and rallies) trying to destroy our republic and how patriotic Americans are going to try and begin to stop them today.

                            I consider anyone who really knows what's going on and still votes democrat to be a traitor. Our White House is now full of them and the America-haters in Congress and elsewhere have slithered out of their holes to show their true colors and it is the duty of Americans not to give them aid or comfort. 

                            Your party has the "stupid vote" wrapped up as they have for years by lying to them and keeping them bought off and I can't call stupid people traitors when they're just being stupid but anybody with a brain who votes democrat is a traitor to our nation in my opinion. Nobody with half a brain is stupid enough to vote democrat unless they agree with and support the campaign of Obama and his democrats and communists to destroy this country.

                            You can throw your lot in with the traitors if you like but there's a lot of us out here that still love this country and we'll do whatever it takes to keep it.

                            Believe that.

                            My condolences to you and your party on the election results later on today.

                            America wins - you lose.

                            Thank God.

                            "Once again though I'll tell you, I'm not a Republican so don't expect me to defend their spending."

                            You sure gave those Democrats a good thrashing!  I can hardly wait to see the shredding you give the Republicans!

                            ROFL

                              rdgrnr's avatar - walt
                              Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
                              United States
                              Member #73904
                              April 28, 2009
                              14903 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: November 2, 2010, 3:07 am - IP Logged

                              "Once again though I'll tell you, I'm not a Republican so don't expect me to defend their spending."

                              You sure gave those Democrats a good thrashing!  I can hardly wait to see the shredding you give the Republicans!

                              ROFL

                              I know that was said tongue-in-cheek tc, but I'm truly no apologist for Republicans.

                              Congress is rife with corruption and lying, self-serving weasels on both sides of the aisle but the democrats have taken the practice to an art form.

                              But since the last election it has gone from corruption to sedition bordering on treason in my opinion on the left side of the aisle and in the White House.

                              Have you ever checked out any of the people Obama has surrounded himself with? His closest advisors and all the Czars he appointed? Do you think it's just a coincidence that they're all far left-wing radicals and avowed communists?

                              Most Republicans in Congress I wouldn't trust in the sh*thouse with a muzzle on but Obama and the democrats are actually trying to destroy this country. That's why they get top billing in my rants.

                              Intelligent people are starting to see what's really going on and that's why you're going to see a virtual, political bloodbath today all across this nation.

                              The dopes are saying "give him a chance" but the smart people know that what he wants is a chance to destroy what he considers this evil country of America. He hates  this country and everything it is and everything it stands for. He thinks we are an evil nation. That's why he went around the world bowing and apologizing to tyrants and dictators. He apologized to the Emperor of Japan for bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki!  Did he forget about a little something called Pearl Harbor? Do you want this idiot representing you?

                              Today is the first step to ridding ourselves of this evil cancer.

                              It's going to be a great day for America.

                              Thank God.


                                                                           
                                                   
                                                                       

                               

                               

                               

                               

                                                                                                                                 

                              "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

                                                                                                                          --Edmund Burke