« Brainwashed My Ass... | Main | Finally Some Common Sense Coming From the Black Community »
December 19, 2003
Letters to the Editor Friday
As a part of the grassroots campaign to help reelect George W. Bush, I call upon all supporters of Bush to participate in a nationwide effort to promote are soon-to-be-reelected President.
ItÕs time to get active in support of the President. I urge you to write letters to the editor. Discuss President BushÕs outstanding leadership, his commitment to America, and demonstrate why America needs him for another term.
If you are interested in participating, you are welcome to discuss any topic.
I hope you consider taking part in the grassroots campaign to help reelect President George W. Bush.
To write a letter to editor, you may use the following form to look up papers in your area and write a letter directly to them:
Posted by Aaron at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
Copyright © 2007 by author. May not be copied, published, or otherwise used (except for brief quotes) without express permission of author. Articles published with permission by Pardon My English.
-->Comments
Re-elect an enemy of civil rights? A guy who lied to get us into a war? And who couldn't run an occupation? A guy who has run up the biggest Federal deficit of all time? What, Aaron, do they pay you to write this stuff?
Posted by Green Boy at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
I finance this site with my tax cuts.
Enemy of civil rights? I call it protecting the citizens. Lied to get into war? http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1022083/posts In war time, deficits are inevitable. And typically followed by a period of prosperity.
Posted by Aaron at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
Wow.....looks like Paul Krugman is visiting blogs now.
As for the defecit--I have an idea--let's cut back on federal spending. Where to start? There's the farm bill, and a few other things
Posted by jaws at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
welfare, get rid of welfare!!!
or atleast reform it severely!
Posted by Aaron at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
We did get some good welfare reform during the 90s (thanks to when the real conservative GOP ruled the House).
I've got an idea--what about free market medicare reform. Or privitization of social security.
Posted by jaws at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
sounds good to me... I'd like to get my SocSecurity when i need it..
Posted by Aaron at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
Reelected? Over my dead body!
"I finance this site with my tax cuts."
Wow. You must be a pretty wealthy guy to have gotten any tax cuts. See, the reason Pardon Your Stupidity is run on blogspot.com is because Marion, myself, and Lou Malchick (the founders) are in the lower-middle and middle classes, and we're paying more taxes. Not less. More. MORE, damnit. Here's a handy chart:
More taxes for rich..Less taxes for rich
Clinton..............Bush
Balanced Economy.....Caused bloody French Revolution
I hope that helps. Don't make me dig out sources.
*
"Enemy of civil rights? I call it protecting the citizens."
So, your definition of protection is to have our fourth, first, and fourteenth ammendments revoked? I wish I lived in a nation where privacy, freedom of speech and religion, and equal protection were nonexsistant! Sounds kinda like, oh, I dunno...NAZI GERMANY? By the way, I listed out the ammendments so as to save you the trouble of having to look them up, you ignorant fool.
*
"In war time, deficits are inevitable. And typically followed by a period of prosperity. "
This is true. Sorta. You see, normally wars boost our economy, such as WWI and II. However, then we had many allies, who helped with the bill, and a losing side, who had to pay for most of it.
However, I do agree that a bear market after a bull market is inevitable. But a deficit? Not unavoidable. Not inevitable. You dumbass. Wars are a quick fix for a shitty economy. Get over the whole "war-helps!" thing. It just is not supported by history.
*
"welfare, get rid of welfare!!!" "sounds good to me... I'd like to get my SocSecurity when i need it.. "
Listen, you idiot, welfare is manditory. I have an 80 year old grandfather who owns his home in a nice Chicago suburb. He owns a mint-condition, rarely-used car. Do you expect him, and people like him, to slowly sell off his belongings to support himself? All americans need x ammount of dollars to survive. To deny them that is murder, and your greedy self-interest is appauling. Just because you are healthy, wealthy, and secure does not mean that you always will be, or that everyone is. I sincerely hope there comes a time in your life when you need Welfare, and I hope you can't get it them because Bush II took it away from you.
*
As I said, OVER MY DEAD BODY.
Posted by Lschuma! at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
I am by no means rich.
I would consider myself in the middle-class bracket. After the recent round of the tax cuts, my pay check grew by $6 every two weeks, hence, $12/month. This plentifully covers my expenses for the web hosting and the domain name. Tax cuts for the rich and businesses makes more sense than the opposite if you want to rebound from recession. Businesses are the entities that employ people like you, me, and everyone else. So, when they get more $, they can invest in the business and improve productivity and sales, thus requiring more of a workforce, hence, jobs. Tax cuts for the middle/lower class wouldn't have as great an effect as quickly.
History does prove that war time stimulates the economy, you said so yourself. Public school, right? (I can make fun of public schools, as I was in them for most of life)
Welfare is the worst kind of charity in existance. Forced charity is not the answer. However, it is pretty clear that welfare is unfortunately here to stay, so if it must, than it needs some serious reformation. I'm not going to pay for some fucknut who can't take care of their life who would rather spend their my money on crack and booze.
I am not wealthy, but I know how to take care of myself, and I know how to market myself to employers so I can continue to get a paycheck. I also have a support system should things get really bad, but things are going good enough so that is unnecessary, but there if I need it. You can't burden every citizen with a few citizens problems. When problems occur, the answer isn't to raise taxes.
Your tone is not acceptable if you wish to remain able to post on this site. You and the rest of the teeny-bopper brigade need to be respectful (regardless of how you think the PME team is behaving) or otherwise be banned from posting. I have no qualms with you posting your thoughts, but you must tone it down, or be shut down.
Posted by Aaron at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
no. lschuma stated that war stimulates the economy. you said that a defecit is expected in war time. you just proved yourself wrong. if you are going to ask lschuma to tone it down, by the way, would you do us the curtesy of refraining from using the phrase "teeny-bopper?" it is really quite annoying. i shall be forced to use the phrase twenty-something-college-graduate-who-has-trouble-disproving-the-arguments-of-high-schoolers-even-though-thy-have-a-major-in-political-science-bopper. i hope it doesn't come to that. that really doesn't roll off the tongue.
Posted by lou at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
you need to learn to read.
Don't even complain about me using terms like "teeny-bopper." This is my site. I rule. I call them like I see them.
Don't you hate those little annoying things... I hate when your sidekick Marion parades around complaining about spelling, when she most certianly overlooks her friends' spelling errors (let's look @ yours): deficit, not defecit courtesy, not curtesy they, not thy
and that is just your most recent comment here.
Now, deficits are an inevitable short term effect of war time because of increased spending. Increased spending leads to economy stimulation. Exactly what I said.
So, I fully expect Marion to tell you to learn how to spell... and I expect you to learn to read what it is people are writing before making stupid judgements.
Posted by Aaron at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
you realize that you are begging for me to go through this site and point out every grammatical error and every error in spelling, don't you?
"In war time, deficits are inevitable." -aaron "History does prove that war time stimulates the economy, you said so yourself." -aaron
that was far too easy.
p.s. you should learn to read.
Posted by lou at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
Lou, you still are not reading.
There is an inital deficit in war time, which is followed by economic stimulation due to increased spending.
Hello??? Anyone home??
Posted by Aaron at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
Your undiminished hypocracy is very telling.
Making fun of the fact that we're still in high school is not your best line of argument. What are the odds you were as politically enlightened as we are at your age? Early development and intelligence is not exactly something to be mocked. The fact that I began driving less than a year ago (that's right, I am 16 years old) and I STILL have the ability to refute your illogical, self-serving points is a compliment to me, not you.
Supply-side economics? Honey, if you were walking with a friend and you spotted a dollar lying on the ground, would you split it with him even though you saw it first? If you were the boss of a company and you get 20,000$ back from taxes, are you honestly saying that you wouldn't pocket the money and move on? Would you really split it up a thousand different ways and give 10$ to each of your employees? No. No matter what you say, that's not realistic. A trickle-down economy helps the rich get richer. If it inspires anyone to work harder, it's the head honcho working harder on his golf game.
Oh, and by the way, congrats on catching Sadaam. What was he arrested for again, exactly?
Posted by lschuma at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
I'll let your statements speak for themselves. I don't think I am needed as a herald to your stupidity. You're doing just fine by yourself. If you want a real debate, start one. I can read. I can tell that you just changed your argument so that you look correct. If you want to argue you're most recent statement, I'm game. I defy you to prove me wrong.
Posted by lou at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
You still don't get it...
We could go on and on displaying your inability to understand what I've been writing, but I'm not wasting my time on you anymore. The proof is in the writing.
Posted by Aaron at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
^ | | | That is called backing down. Pick an idea, stick to it, and defend it. It's called rhetoric.
Posted by Lschuma! at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
I have not wavered from my stance. I will not discuss this anymore. Going around in circles is waste of bandwidth. Don't waste any more time discussing it.
Posted by Aaron at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
Oh, are you low on bandwidth? How about you BUY some more with your TAX CUTS?
Your arguments really are pathetic if you're too afraid to discuss them, and then have to turn around and feign indignance at our supposed "stupidity". You are definately running away from the issues and trying to cover your tracks with dumb excuses. It's very, very sad.
Posted by Lschuma! at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
No tracks needed to cover. I sinply want to put an end to this stupid meaningless bickering. This is exactly what I said, "deficits are an inevitable short term effect of war time because of increased spending. Increased spending leads to economy stimulation."
Can't dispute it, it is the truth.
Stop the stupid pissing contest, or I'll put an end to it in other ways.
Let's argue about something substantive, please.
I am not, and never will be afraid of you.
Posted by Aaron at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
"History does prove that war time stimulates the economy, you said so yourself."
okay, so war does not stimulate the economy.
"There is an inital deficit in war time, which is followed by economic stimulation due to increased spending."
but wait. war causes increased spending, which, in turn, stimulates the economy. this means that war stimulates the economy. what the hell? i must not be able to read, because those two statements, both written by aaron, seem to me to be contradictory. this must pose a dilemma for you, aaron. you said you wouldn't debate this anymore. if you comment, you're a liar. but you can't let a litte peon high schooler get the last word, can you? decisions, decisions.
Posted by lou at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
you really need to remember that everything you write here stays in print. that is, unless you finally decide to 'vanquish' the comments. so, anything you write, we have very easy access to. it would be wise not to contradict yourself. and, war stimulates the economy, joseph mccarthy was a manipulative lush, ann coulter is a stupid bitch, and liberals are neither nazis or communists.
Posted by lou at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
god damn it lou, if you are going to remain completely close minded, I am not going to bother listening to your shit.
Posted by Aaron at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
Even before the war, our economy wasn't so hot, so I don't think I'd blame the war for that. Assuming I'm remembering my history classes right, war does stimulate the economy, but I don't recall whether or not it is an immediate effect, so I won't comment.
Also, Aaron, as a simple polite request, could you seriously stop calling us teeny boppers? I may be 16, but I'm a senior in high school taking mostly college classes who dislikes being put on the same level as her peers because she finds them to be less than intelligent little twits. I have few friends my age for that reason and think that I hardly fit anyone's definition of "teeny bopper." Do correct me if I'm wrong, but I mean this as simply a respectful request.
Posted by Katie at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
if you want to see close-minded, buddy, talk to tyler, ya big liar.
Posted by lou at December 19, 2003 11:12 AM
Note: Comments once posted become the property of Pardon My English. We therefore reserve the right to make use of such in any manner and for whatever purpose we deem appropriate. Please refer to comment policy for further information.


