Skip to comments.
Hillary Clinton: "We're Going to Take Things Away From You on Behalf of the Common Good"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1162094/posts ^
| Tuesday, June 29, 2004
| Kristinn
Posted on 06/29/2004 6:12:49 AM PDT by kristinn
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 301-316 next last
To: freeperfromnj
So, in other words, McGoofy acts as though the "rich" people took something away from the lower and middle classes in the first place?
121
posted on
06/29/2004 8:20:24 AM PDT
by
Tolerance Sucks Rocks
(Meatwad make the money see; Meatwad get the honeys, G.)
To: kristinn
THANKS.
Out to my email list.
122
posted on
06/29/2004 8:20:55 AM PDT
by
Quix
(Choose this day whom U will serve: Shrillery & demonic goons or The King of Kings and Lord of Lords)
To: kristinn
I wonder what amount of taking would satisfy her/them?
123
posted on
06/29/2004 8:22:06 AM PDT
by
Tolerance Sucks Rocks
(Meatwad make the money see; Meatwad get the honeys, G.)
To: kristinn; HAL9000
124
posted on
06/29/2004 8:23:27 AM PDT
by
Petronski
(I'm **NOT** always **CRANKY**.)
To: Carry_Okie
>>Well, at least the Republicans are protecting money
Are you kidding? Have they done anything about the impending collapse of Social Security? How much did you pay in taxes last year? Statistically speaking, I pay more in taxes than most Americans make and I am by no means wealthy. Giving me a paltry tax cut doesn't make up the republicans big government agenda and spending habits.
To: William Terrell
You seem to have a comprehensive understanding of the topic. So what is the alternative? Status quo? Like I mentioned, I am suffering an audit right now, so it is hard for me to imagine anything less complicated or intrusive than the income tax.
126
posted on
06/29/2004 8:34:32 AM PDT
by
JTHomes
To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
I wonder what amount of taking would satisfy her/them? Headline from the future:
President Fox of Mexico asks President Hillary Clinton to help Stem Flow of Illegals from Her Country
127
posted on
06/29/2004 8:39:15 AM PDT
by
OSHA
(Note to Self: They always suspect the husband first.)
To: Major_Risktaker
I know this will make a great sign sometime -- Hillary's showing her true agenda -- We're Going to Take Things Away From You on Behalf of the Common Good."
128
posted on
06/29/2004 8:40:16 AM PDT
by
Angelwood
(FReepers are Everywhere! We Support Our Troops! (Hillary's Vast Rt Wg Conspiracy))
To: William Terrell
With NRST, it would take away the argument of the Hillary types, because a tax increase would hit everyone, and it would be very visible. That seems like a plus.
129
posted on
06/29/2004 8:46:32 AM PDT
by
JTHomes
To: All
Wicked Witch of the East
To: kristinn
![](http://metafella.topcities.com/bush/bp12/hillary.jpg)
"The Constitution?!! That's so quaint. Run along now."
131
posted on
06/29/2004 8:52:33 AM PDT
by
Mad_Tom_Rackham
(Face it. You're just not nuanced enough.)
To: William Terrell
What tax would be more egregious than the income tax, and why?
132
posted on
06/29/2004 8:58:24 AM PDT
by
Tolerance Sucks Rocks
(Meatwad make the money see; Meatwad get the honeys, G.)
To: kristinn
We are
"convinced that a lasting recovery of our folk can only come about from within on the principle: COMMON GOOD BEFORE INDIVIDUAL GOOD"--Point 24 of the National Socialist Party platform, 1923
Come to think of it, Hillary supports most of that platform.
133
posted on
06/29/2004 9:08:31 AM PDT
by
snopercod
("Stay quiet and you’ll be OK." -- Muhammad Atta)
To: Carry_Okie
When you get down to the essence of the two parties, they both believe in taking your money by force. Our republican president and republican congress together have outdone the clinton administration in that regard. The fact that they said "charge it" doesn't alter the fact that federal discretionary spending has gone up 25% since Bush took office.
The only difference that I can see between the two parties is how they want to spend your money "for the common good", and frankly, there isn't a whole lot of difference even in that any more.
134
posted on
06/29/2004 9:16:31 AM PDT
by
snopercod
("Stay quiet and you’ll be OK." -- Muhammad Atta)
To: kristinn
135
posted on
06/29/2004 9:37:42 AM PDT
by
goodnesswins
(Never underestimate the desire of a socialist to TAKE AWAY YOUR HARD EARNED FUNDS to help "others")
To: JTHomes
I understand the audit nightmare.
The income tax has about reached the point where its increase will foment a internal war. More and more people are opting to not pay it. They use various foundations for their rebellion, their approaches 99% dead wrong.
But dead wrong or not, they are exercising a very ancient right of human beings in a social context: to vote with their feet or their fist, the current term for that being " civil disobedience".
The Treasury Dept. doesn't have the personnel to handle it. One little increase in the income taxes on any front will increase exponentially the foot voters and the system will collapse for all intents and purposes, although will still be in place.
The problem will force a confrontation that is long overdue. That confrontation has already been biting. No agency of the Treasury Dept. has been able to answer the question why an American citizen comes under the authority of Title 26 having to do with income taxes.
The indication that that system is cracking is demonstrated by the fact that they will not answer the question, when the answer, if legitimate, would be a most simple to end the controversy.
I am for the forms that the general government, using its national or federal power, has traditionally used to finance itself. Those forms are a debate for another time.
The fact is, that the income and social security taxes are for the purpose of financing our developing socialist systems. I hate socialism in any form, so I may not be an objective person to ask.
136
posted on
06/29/2004 9:39:40 AM PDT
by
William Terrell
(Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
To: William Terrell
Post of the Year on FreeRepublic.
To: kristinn
We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."Let's see... "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need"... now where did that quote come from???
To: freeperfromnj
This will end up liek the bill to impose a luxury tax on yachts..remember..it destroyed several boat builders..laid off thousands of workers..
139
posted on
06/29/2004 9:52:40 AM PDT
by
ken5050
(We've looked for WMD in Iraq for LESS time than Hillary looked for the Rose Law firm billing records)
To: kristinn
Hillary is a die hard Marxist BUT the redistribution does NOT apply to her. She is the one that should reap the benefits of the redistribution since she is heads and shoulders above the rest of us and knows what is best for us. At some point she might even claim to be god.
140
posted on
06/29/2004 9:53:27 AM PDT
by
nmh
(Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 301-316 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson