Posted on 02/13/2016 4:37:06 PM PST by PJBankard
Link Only. Live Stream @ Link.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
No, he tried to kill the previous President of the US.
Yes, Trump’s book was written in 1987. Trumps concern was for people who talked such a good game they convinced people, but did not necessarily have strong follow-through. On the next page, I see a great quote: “The point is that you can dream great dreams, but they’ll never amount to much if you can’t turn them into reality at a reasonable cost.” He certainly followed that principle in NH where his votes were a real bargain compared with other candidates.
And it was the opinion of many more that the war was fought to fight Al Qaeda over there instead of fighting over here. Many believed that Saddam was providing a safe haven for Al Qaeda to train, including mock-ups of airline fuselages. Let Iraq be the magnet where Al Qaeda concentrates to fight us.
I believed that we killed Osama bin Laden in Tora Bora, but I guess he did escape when we granted them a 12-hour humanitarian ceasefire.
-PJ
Well, but that’s the point: unless they ship it via pipeline, the little piddly amounts they can ship by truck are meaningless. And, the locals who get it are going to have to be 100% in with us. It’s been done before.
From CIA:
https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd_2004/index.html
Me too....I will not vote for that Maniac who needs to be in a straight jacket while in a debate.
There is no need for him to do that, silly. Ted Cruz for President of these already Great United States of America, and Ted Cruz being an American Citizen has made it even greater.
Summary? Point?
I disagree. The priority should be to get rid of the 16th. period. Anything less is just marginal.
Tracking on the same Sanders course will guarantee high VAT, high sales taxes AND high marginal income tax rates.
You know I like Cruz, so far, but he needs to get a definitive ruling by a federal court on whether he’ a natural born citizen. His hesitancy to do so speaks to me of his concern for being DQ’d before he has a chance to win. It also appears that he hopes if he wins the nomination that would give weight to a ruling in his favor if challenged. But that is a gamble not just for himself but for the whole election and for those of us who love America and want to see her recover.
Cruz should show us his good faith in putting America before his own political prospects by selflessly putting the issue before a federal court. He should have had this put to bed a long time ago. The longer he waits the more I distrust him and his motives.
Defending 100% of a pipeline 24/7 isn’t easy, especially with all those ranged munitions in the area. Based on the regions recent history I’m not sure its possible even with massive US ground presence. Too many hate us there and would be willing to die to attack ‘our’ oil. So long as it’s ‘their’ oil they’ll let it flow and use the revenues against us. And even if it were remotely possible, defending that possibility would be a yuge political negative for Trump. The public doesn’t trust those locals to work with us and it certainly doesn’t want us back there on any non-lethal missions. I don’t understand why no one has called him on it.
Your reply, I disagree. The priority should be to get rid of the 16th. period. Anything less is just marginal.
??
I dont think Cruz is talking about a VAT. This is being used to smear him, as he wants a national sales tax.
The national sales tax incentives retail production instead of retail consumption.
If we give up on repealing the 16th amendment, it is all over. We will continue to import welfare cases, the socialists will take over and everything moves will taxed. A VAT will be included to pay for the ‘free’ college.
The retail sales tax also has the feature of broadening the tax base, including illegals who drink cerveza.
As far as Trump goes, I am ok with hedge fund managers paying on income instead of on cap gains. But it wont stop there- we would likely end up with FDR style brackets again and ‘shelters’. Remember the original 1913 income tax was only for the ‘rich’. Today that would translate to only those who make millions per year.
Of course, once the premise of income tax was accepted, we got withholding from FDR and lower brackets. Then it was off to the races for government intrusion.
You mean some people make a hundred thousand a year?
That for Cruz supporters, any “MEANS” justify their desired end result
As opposed to Trump supporters flushing conservatism, or worse, trying to redefine it.
lol. If I had it my way, 90% of Americans would make over 250K per year and we would all have a much higher standard of living...
First of all a free people don't want the government to use tax to "incentive" anything. The best incentive is freedom from government interference and coercion.
Secondly, a "national sales tax" (NST) should be limited to the final customer purchases at the cash register. Anything else especially upstream form the final purchase is VAT and "incentives" undue government intrusion and interference as well as more hidden tax. So you need to do away with the terminology of "production" as well as "consumption" and until the 16A is repealed, the whole discussion of NST.
No. Production and consumption at the retail level is the essential element in an economic sense.
Unless the tax paying base is broadened and production is encouraged, we end up 94 million americans not working and over 50 million on food stamps.
50% of the population pay no federal income tax. There is a real danger of the system collapsing if we do not significantly broaden the tax paying base.
Eventually, the producers ‘Go Galt’ and we have big problems like Greece.
Again, you’re making his point. You/we don’t have to defend it. If the pipeline is blown up, ISIS gets none of it. Either way, we win.
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.