| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
last time here
Guest
|
in indonesia..did anyone see that picture of that rat? those scientists had
better go to new york or, better yet, detroit in the alley behind the
greektown casino. i saw one about 6 years ago run away from a dumpster.
that sucker was as big as a rottweiler, and i ain't joken!!!!! 
i was going to chase him but...uhhhh LTH's foot started to bother him..
2tap or FC would have blown it to smithereens!!!!  |
_________________
Guest post |
|
Thu Dec 20, 2007 8:54 pm |
|
|
Deena
F L I N T O I D
|
| Ewwww. There is nothing more terrifying to me than a rat. Hell, I have been known to resemble a cartoon character on a chair at the sight of a mouse! |
|
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:27 am |
|
|
Deena
F L I N T O I D
|
PS: I can kill a mean spider though and snakes don't faze me...  |
|
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:28 am |
|
|
terrybankert
F L I N T O I D
|
Your right there are new rats around.
Rats are of various political doctrines.
"True rats" are members of the genus Rattus, the most dangerous of which to humans are the republican rats
Rattus republicanus
, and the presidential primary rat,
Rattus. Sayanthingus
.
Many members of other rodent genera and families are also called rats and share many characteristics with republican rats. A rat has an average life span of 8 years or two terms in the White House.
Republican Rats
are distinguished from United States Citizens by their net worth size; rats generally have small brains and a large anus. Often referred to by the latter as a nickname.
A new dangerous family is the
Rattus Mittusromenyus
or for short Mitt Romeny.
A
Mitt Romeny
is 6ft tall often walks upright, tucks its tail high within itself, has no hair out of place, can be often seen looking in a mirror.
Be warned to wash if found in contact with this ratticus because it is filthy(rich).
You can tell immediately when this rattus is lying.. Its lips are moving.
Do not feed it or give it your vote.. it just eggs them on...
43 |
|
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2007 6:00 am |
|
|
FlintConservative
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
terrybankert schreef:
Republican Rats
are distinguished from United States Citizens by their net worth size; rats generally have small brains and a large anus.
Ahhh, the infamous class warfare routine. As if the Clintons/Ted Kennedy/John Kerry/John Edwards/George Soros/Bill Gates/Warren Buffett/et al were just common everyday blue collar laborers.
Rebublicans don't have a corner on net worth any more than the Democrats have a corner on intelligence. After all, the dumbest person ever, according to you, is George Bush. How is it that someone so stupid could trick Hillary/Kerry and all those other Dems into voting to authorize use of force in Iraq? |
|
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:12 am |
|
|
Dave Starr
F L I N T O I D
|
| Left out was the
Hillirat
, which has no brain and must rely on polls and focus groups for all decisions. |
_________________
I used to care, but I take a pill for that now.
Pushing buttons sure can be fun.
When a lion wants to go somewhere, he doesn’t worry about how many hyenas are in the way.
Paddle faster, I hear banjos. |
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:35 am |
|
|
Dave Starr
F L I N T O I D
|
| OOPS! Forgot about the
Demincongressrat
. It makes a lot of rude noises, but accomplishes nothing. Subspecies include the Harryreidrat and the Nancypelosirat. |
_________________
I used to care, but I take a pill for that now.
Pushing buttons sure can be fun.
When a lion wants to go somewhere, he doesn’t worry about how many hyenas are in the way.
Paddle faster, I hear banjos. |
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:40 am |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
And of course the
Spewithfortusnonfactualposts rat
Democrats wake up to being the party of the rich
by Michael Franc
A legislative proposal that was once on the fast track is suddenly dead. The Senate will not consider a plan to extract billions in extra taxes from megamillionaire hedge fund managers.
The decision by Senate majority leader Harry Reid, the Nevada Democrat, surprised many Washington insiders, who saw the plan as appealing to the spirit of class warfare that infuses the Democratic party. Liberal disappointment in Mr Reid was palpable at media outlets such as USA Today, where an editorial chastised: "The Democrats, who control Congress and claim to represent the middle and lower classes, ought to be embarrassed."
Far from embarrassing, this episode may reflect a dawning Democratic awareness of whom they really represent. For the demographic reality is that, in America, the Democratic party is the new "party of the rich". More and more Democrats represent areas with a high concentration of wealthy households. Using Internal Revenue Service data, the Heritage Foundation identified two categories of taxpayers - single filers with incomes of more than $100,000 and married filers with incomes of more than $200,000 - and combined them to discern where the wealthiest Americans live and who represents them.
Democrats now control the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions. More than half of the wealthiest households are concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats control both Senate seats.
This new political demography holds true in the House of Representatives, where the leadership of each party hails from different worlds. Nancy Pelosi, Democratic leader of the House of Representatives, represents one of America's wealthiest regions. Her San Francisco district has more than 43,700 high-end households. Fewer than 7,000 households in the western Ohio district of House Republican leader John Boehner enjoy this level of affluence.
The next rung of House leadership shows the same pattern. Democratic majority leader Steny Hoyer's district is home to the booming suburban communities between Washington, DC, and Annapolis. It boasts almost 19,000 wealthy households and a median income topping $62,000. Mr Hoyer's counterpart, minority whip Roy Blunt, hails from a rural Missouri district that has only 5,200 wealthy households and whose median income is only $33,000.
Income disparity - to use the class warrior's favourite term - is greatest among the districts of lawmakers that lead each party's campaign arm. Maryland senator Chris Van Hollen chairs the Democratic congressional campaign committee. With more than 36,000 prosperous households and a median income of nearly $70,000, his suburban Washington district even out-sparkles Ms Pelosi's. In contrast, fewer than 5,000 such wealthy households are found in the largely rural district of his Republican counterpart, Tom Cole from Oklahoma. The median income there is only $35,500.
Democratic politicians prosper in areas of concentrated wealth even in staunchly Republican states such as Georgia, Kansas and Utah. Liberal congressman John Lewis represents more than 27,500 high-income households in his Atlanta district. The trend achieves perfect symmetry in Iowa. There, the three wealthiest districts send Democrats to Washington; the two poorest are safe Republican seats.
Soon this new political demographic may give traditional purveyors of class warfare the yips. To comply with new budget rules, liberal Democrats on Capitol Hill are readying a tax increase of at least $1,000bn over the next decade. Ms Pelosi says she wants to extract all of this from "the wealthy". When has a party ever championed a policy that would inflict so much pain on its own constituency? At what point will affluent Democrats crack and mount a Blue State tax rebellion?
Will we see the emergence of a real-life Howard Beale, the television anchorman played by Peter Finch in the movie Network ? Beale was disgusted with America's deteriorating 1970s economy and culture. One night he snapped and implored viewers to get out of their chairs. "Go to the window, open it, and stick your head out and yell: 'I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take this any more!' "
Or will Democratic voters follow a different cinematic lead, that of the fraternity pledge in Animal House? Perhaps they will accept these tax rises as a political and economic hazing and greet each new tax hike with: "Thank you, sir. May I have another?" |
_________________
"If you like your current healthcare you can keep it, Period"!!
Barack Hussein Obama--- multiple times. |
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:56 am |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
Study: Democrats the party of the rich
November 23, 2007
By Donald Lambro - Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional districts.
In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage Foundation, found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions were represented by Democrats.
He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats.
"If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional districts, we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of those jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said.
A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said.
But in a broader measurement, the study also showed that of the 167 House districts where the median annual income was higher than the national median of $48,201, a slight majority, 84 districts, were represented by Democrats. Median means that half of all income earners make more than that level and half make less.
Mr. Franc's study also showed that contrary to the Democrats' tendency to define Republicans as the party of the rich, "the vast majoritiy of unabashed conservative House members hail from profoundly middle-class districts."
"I just found the pattern across the board to be very interesting. That pattern shows the likelihood of electing a Democrat to the House is very closely correlated with how many wealthy households are in that district," Mr. Franc said in an interview with The Washington Times.
The shift in the number of wealthier Democratic districts got a significant bounce in the last election.
"A fair number of these districts are represented by freshmen, a lot of the guys who got elected in 2006," he said.
"The demographic reality is that the Democratic Party is the new 'party of the rich.' More and more Democrats represent areas with a high concentration of wealthy households," he wrote on Nov. 5 in the Financial Times of London, in a preview of his study.
In addition, the current Senate tax debate provides an example of how the Democrats' rich constituents are influencing their agenda and have divided House and Senate Democrats.
In the House, for example, Democrats have made elimination of the alternative minimum tax, known as the AMT, the centerpiece of a sweeping tax-revision plan crafted by Rep. Charles B. Rangel of New York, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. The AMT law was passed by the Democratic Congress in 1969 to make sure that wealthy taxpayers — some of whom were able to use tax breaks to avoid paying anything — paid at least some taxes.
Over the years, as many middle-class incomes rose, people were increasingly being pushed into higher tax brackets once reserved for only the richest Americans. The largest portion of these taxpayers live predominantly in Northeastern "blue" states dominated by Democrats, who, inundated by constituent complaints, soon began joining their Republican counterparts in pushing to eliminate the AMT.
But the strongest manifestation of the influence that the Democrats' wealthiest constituencies are wielding over party policy came earlier this month as Democratic leaders were considering a proposal to offset revenue losses from AMT repeal by raising taxes on hedge-fund managers, many of whom are major contributors to the Democratic Party.
A "stopgap" bill authored by Mr. Rangel to tax hedge-fund compensation at 35 percent as regular income rather than the current 15 percent capital-gains rate, which passed the House Nov. 9, appears to be going nowhere with Senate Democrats.
Sen. Charles E. Schumer of New York, the chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which has raised tens of millions of dollars from Wall Street financiers and hedge-fund managers, opposes Mr. Rangel's plan. Earlier this month, Sen. Max Baucus of Montana, the chairman of the tax-writing Finance Committee, said the tax increase was a bad idea and could not pass the Senate.
Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, the House Democratic Caucus chairman, also has said he wants a stand-alone fix for the AMT without an offsetting tax increase, fearing that any vote to raise taxes now will hurt vulnerable Democrats in next year's elections. More moderate Blue Dog Democrats in the House have also been among the critics of the tax increase.
Some Democrats acknowledge that moneyed interests are exerting a strong influence on their party's agenda and legislation.
"The fact is that [the Democratic campaign committees] have had large contributions from these hedge-fund folks," said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a liberal think tank.
"As far as the hedge funds and tax breaks go, the Democrats are clearly getting a lot of money from people who are affected by that, and they're responding," Mr. Baker said.
Mr. Franc thinks this turnabout by Democrats, whose campaign mantra has long been to tax the rich more, is only the beginning.
"Increasingly, we will see Democrats responding to the economic demands of this particular upper-income constituency," he said.
"What the data suggests is that there will be a natural limit to how far and how much the Democrats can sock it to the rich, because in doing so, it means they will have to sock it to their own constituents," Mr. Franc said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
_________________
"If you like your current healthcare you can keep it, Period"!!
Barack Hussein Obama--- multiple times. |
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:00 am |
|
|
last time here
Guest
|
| DAMN!!!!!!! terry, what did you start????? |
_________________
Guest post |
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:53 pm |
|
|
terrybankert
F L I N T O I D
|
| I can't help my self its too much fun. Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas, or what ever you call the celebration of a special birthday....trb |
|
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2007 3:22 pm |
|
|
Ryan Eashoo
F L I N T O I D
|
Can't we all just get along here??
quote:
last time here schreef:
DAMN!!!!!!! terry, what did you start?????
|
_________________
Flint Michigan Resident, Tax Payer, Flint Nutt - Local REALTOR - Activist. www.FlintTown.com |
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:12 pm |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
Yes it is fun Merry Christmas to you also Terry
|
_________________
"If you like your current healthcare you can keep it, Period"!!
Barack Hussein Obama--- multiple times. |
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:28 pm |
|
|
last time here
Guest
|
and to all a good night!!! HO HO HO!!!!  |
_________________
Guest post |
|
|
Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:37 pm |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
LT whos the 3 hos you refering to.  |
_________________
"If you like your current healthcare you can keep it, Period"!!
Barack Hussein Obama--- multiple times. |
|
|
Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:54 pm |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Political Talk
