I've been waiting for a good chance to use that pic.
Posted on 10/26/2012 4:39:32 AM PDT by tioga
I've been waiting for a good chance to use that pic.
I think that one of the most egregious things about the income tax is that churches are not as willing to speak on social and moral issues in politics or even say there is a good or evil candidate running because they are afraid of being attacked by the IRS (Infernal Robbing Scum)
Here's my favorite part:
One big factor is raw turnout and enthusiasm among the Buckeye State's rural areas and social conservatives.
The Romney team sees President Barack Obama's win in 2008 as having more to do with depressed GOP enthusiasm for Sen. John McCain than it did a surge of enthusiasm for Mr. Obama.
This is exactly what is happening thoroughout Ohio and our voter totals so far have already gone beyond what we had in 2008 and the Democrat lead is shrinking more and more the closer we get to election day. On Election day the Republicans come out big time and will swamp the SS Obama and give Romney the win.
In the words of Riley in the movie 'National Treasure', "Our evil plan is working...."
I should know that right? I could have checked my roll call.
Looking good in Ohio. A+++
One of the amusing things about this election was when Romney released his tax returns and the libs laughed because he did not use all his deductions and paid too much in taxes. Seems the only ones who can get it wrong according to libs are Republicans.
Five minutes left? That is a lifetime if you have a good offense. So it would depend on more than the info provided. The upside is kicking instead of punting and hoping for a longer field of play for your opponent. What brought up this question?
ok, kiddies...I have errands to run. BBL
Thomas Sowell wrote a column recently about capital gains and why they are taxed at a different rate. Basically, making the point that guaranteed income (from a job with a salary/wages) is vastly different from investing your own money in a venture with no guarantee of success.
If we tax them the same, then everyone would just “get a job” instead of taking a risk.
A risk like owning a coal mine and ending up successful enough to run for the senate.
i simply do not get how people cannot understand that sort of difference as far as RISK. the libs have done an excellent job of making people think that a BIG PAYDAY is just luck and should be taxed.
The situation arose in last night’s game for our arch rival. They punted from the end zone without any trouble, but it’s one where I probably would have taken the safety.
Their offense was getting nothing done (they finished with negative 15 yards rushing). A blocked punt TD would have effectively ended the game.
If you give the points and take the free kick, then my team starts from further down the field. A FG ties the game (and in HS OT from the 10 yard line, scoring is easier) and a TD still wins it.
It seemed like the situation made for a safety.
As it worked out, it didn’t matter. But it could have gone badly for them (good for us).
The game ended 7-6.
If something that simple was on a chart in their faces, you have to wonder if even that might get through to the idiots
If something that simple was on a chart in their faces, you have to wonder if even that might get through to the idiots
The thing “against” Smith is that he was a democrat only 2 years ago. He’s an “Obama Republican” in that the Obama party sent his screaming for the exits. The “establishment” endorsed another guy in the primary.
But, for a guy with no chance of winning and no name recognition, he’s doing pretty darn good.
I would take the safety. Based on the fact that your placekicking game is nonexistent, you’re going to need to score a touchdown to win. If you take the safety and punt from your 20, unmolested, instead of from your 5, you should gain 15-25 yards of field position. Since you’re going to need a defensive stop and a touchdown to win, those yards, with time running out, could be crucial. Bottom line—if you have a low probability of eventually kicking a field goal, being down by 4 doesn’t hurt you any more than being down by 1, and the improved field position could help.
(Nobody else should bother answering. I am right.)
i guess given where he came from, being a dem makes sense. those are my roots there. St James the Greater Church and elementary school in Apollo, PA, Armstrong Co. is where i went to church and attended school. No one had $ there, there were no rich kids in that school. The fact that this guy grew up there and made it is astounding to me.
Wait, you said “down by 4” - a safety is 2 points so that would mean you would still be only down by 3 so a FG would tie up the game. Right?
I see your point - interesting situation. And you would think that a coach could see the advantage to that strategy - but you never know how a coach is thinking. We had a bad few minutes in our game last week against TCU when our OC called a time out, then Tubby (not a fan) called another one (using our LAST time out) immediately after because he didn’t agree.... fans were not happy. It worked out but sure was tense for awhile.
Duh! You are right. But my logic still holds. If you can’t kick a field goal, trailing by 1 or by 3 has the same effect. Actually, trailing by 1,2,3,4, or 5 would have the same effect. Thanks for correcting me.
Interestingly though, there have been several safety's in the NFL this season.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.