timesjoke

Well you called yourself lazy, you will never make good money until you get past being lazy. I don't know, I've seen how Congress seems to operate, might be an ideal job for a lazy fat bastard Well you will have to start with an advanced education, and that takes a lot of hard work so most likely not.

lol, looks like you put a lot of time into that post kid, too bad I didn't waste my time reading any of it once you first admitted you could not take care of yourself and had to go leech off your parents to survive life. Maybe if you were no so lazy you could have worked harder and earned enough money to be an independent person instead of a lazy leech. How long you going to lean on your parents to survive kid? 25? 30? 35? How old is too old to be living at home with mommy and daddy? Understanding something as complex as a City budget requires a little more thought than you are directing at this issue. So let me say this simpler this time, maybe you can understand it this time: The city already has plenty of money allocated to cover regular expenses for the operation and payroll of the firefighters. What they deserve to get paid for is the "EXTRA" expenses they incur responding to a fire in the County. So what is that cost Joker? Do you know? Can you stop with the personal attacks and tell me in a logical way what extra expenses the fire department will have over and above the basic cost? As I said before, my point was trying to come up with ideas and ways fire fighters could fight fires and not be forced to stand and watch as family homes burn down. You have completely avoided the spirit of the conversation I offered in your need to try and take shots at me like a child. Grow up, if you want to debate things stop trying to make everything about your anger at me and start talking about the actual topic.

Direct quote and no other way to take it than he believes some people should not vote. The reason we both gave for this is different, but the desire for some people to vote and other people to nbot vote is exactly the same. All the excuses and personal attacks do not change what he said. You are wasting a lot of time on things that have nothing to do with the fact that Joe is a hypocrite.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/11/08/georgia.teen.beaten/index.html?hpt=T1 (CNN) -- The mother of a Georgia teen beaten at a house party referred to her son as a "silent hero" and called for justice after the four teens accused of his murder appeared in court Monday morning. "My son did not die in vain," said Monique Revaida, the mother of 18-year-old Bobby Maurice Tillman. "Something will be done about these children attacking each other for nothing." Horace Damon Coleman, 19, Emanuel Benjamin Boykins, 18, Quantez Devonta Mallory, 18, and Tracen Franklin, 19, were brought into the courtroom one by one to face one count of felony murder. Police say the boys beat Tillman to death outside a party in metro Atlanta that had gotten out of control Saturday night. Sheriff Phil Miller told CNN the attack happened after girls got into a fight, and one of the girls hit a boy. One of the suspects, according to Miller, said he wasn't going to "hit a girl," but the next guy who came by was going to get "beat down." Tillman was the unfortunate victim, and he was a "little guy, 18 years old, 5-foot-6, weighed 125 pounds," said Miller, who added that he didn't think the boys even knew each other. The suspect went to Douglas County High School, while Tillman went to Chapel Hill, the sheriff said. A judge ordered no bail for the suspects until they can speak with an attorney. All but Franklin asked for court-appointed counsel. His mother told the judge she had already hired an attorney for her son. Police arrived on the scene early Sunday. They were called by the mother of the girl who had hosted the party after it had gotten out of control. Miller said there were 60 to 80 people at the party. Fifty-seven witnesses were taken in for questioning. After the initial hearing, the sheriff responded to criticism from parents who complained about partygoers being bused in from the party to the police station, and held without their permission. "This is not about the sheriff's office or the inconveniences about solving a murder case," Miller said. "And that's what we did, and that's what we're proud of." The Douglas County district attorney stood next to the victim's mother, calling the attack "an absolutely unprovoked senseless killing" of a "completely innocent victim." "I don't think we're ever gonna learn why it happened," D.A. David McCabe said. Some family members praised officials for the way they have handled the case so far. They held up a large framed prom portrait of Tillman for reporters to see as his mother described him as a person who loved basketball. "My son was an angel here on earth," Revaida said solemnly, "just a good person." No drugs or alcohol were found at the scene, according to the sheriff, and he doesn't expect any more charges in the case. A grand jury will convene in two weeks. The suspects are expected to be indicted at that time. I have to say that if they really killed this kid just because he was the unlucky next guy to walk by, they should all go to prison for 25 years or more IMHO.

http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/11/08/fox-exclusive-defeated-democrats-pen-letter-implore-pelosi-step-aside From a House Democratic Source: FOX has obtained a letter being penned by defeated House Democrats that implores House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to step aside. The letter is now circulating Capitol Hill and has not yet been sent to the Speaker. FOX has obtained draft language of the letter. In the draft of the letter, the members say that they were "victimized by a national wave of resentment toward Democrats, a wave that ensnared you along with us." The letter goes on to say "Madam Speaker, fairly or unfairly, Republicans made you the face of the resentment and disagreement in our races. While we commend your years of service to our party and your leadership through many tough times, we respectfully ask that you step aside as the top Democrat in the House." The letter says that the defeated members "fear that Republicans will further demonize you, and in so doing, they will scare potential candidates out. The prospect of having to run against their own party leadership, in addition to their Republican opponent is simply too daunting." The lawmakers also say that "one mark of a strong leader is the ability to discern when it is time to pass the baton" and calls this a "dark hour." The letter closes asking Pelosi to step aside. Full text of the letter below. Unclear who exactly will sign it and when it will go to the Speaker. Letter from Defeated Members: Many of us want the chance to run again and reclaim the seats that we lost on Tuesday. With you as the leader of House Democrats, the hangover of 2010 stands no chance of subsiding. Many of us have run our last race but remain committed to our party; we want to help recruit successful candidates to run in our stead. Unfortunately, we fear that Republicans will further demonize you, and in so doing they will scare potential candidates out. The prospect of having to run against their own party leadership in addition to their Republican opponent is simply too daunting. This is a difficult letter to write, because we admire your commitment, your drive, and your conviction. You have been an historic figure in our great nation, and for that we are all proud, as should you be. Nonetheless, we each experienced how Republican demonization of you and your leadership contributed to our defeat. It is impossible not to judge the results of November 2nd as anything but a profound loss. We want to recover. Recovery of our majority in the House necessitates new leadership at the top of our party. We believe that you can and will play an extraordinary role in our party, and it is extremely unfortunate that Republicans have taken away your ability to lead as effectively as you are able. Nonetheless, one mark of a strong leader is the ability to discern when it is time to pass the baton. As defeated members, whose party needs to rebuild, we are counting on you to show the strength of your leadership in this dark hour. We ask that you step aside as leader of our party in the House.

Yeah, I'm kind of a twisted individual when it comes to my sexual endeavors. But at least I can still get it up. Jealous, TJ? Whatever tripps your trigger Joker, if you like poo in a sexual way, then so be it. Maybe it is the fact I only connect sex with love but I have never had an issue with showing my love for the one I care about, I don't have to 'gin up' arousal the way you do my friend.

No, but it sure looks like you need to look in the mirror to see why things like this get started kid. How can I "reply" to something if you don't first make the coment I reply to? Everything staerts with something, and in this case, it started with you. People with Alzheimer's don't remember stuff; I remember very clearly how Bender claimed the Republicans would not win hardly anything. I tried to get Bender to make a bet with me but he did his usual Progressive 'bury his head' move and pretended to not notice as a self-protective measure. But again I am only "responding" to a flame by Bender, I can't "reply" to a flame from him if he does not first flame me now can I kid? I rarely start any flames or mess like this, but I don't mind playing along and getting in the gutter with you childish idiots if that is what you insist on doing. I just get a kick out of how you guys get so emotional over stuff on the internet. I feed your illness because I love to see you lose your self-control and prove to me and even to yourself that you are incapable of accepting defeat so this kind of behavior is what you guys do to try and "get even" with me. Funny as hell to be honest.

The average American does not know where the real waste is. Almost all Departments of the Government spend from 1/4 to 1/3 of their funds on the buracracy needed to control the agency. The federal Government could easily drop 1/4 of it's spending by eliminating the buracracy. This works at the local level as well. Take a school system for example, most County School systems spend around 1/3 of their budget on things and people who do not teach children one thing. Millions are spent on mowing grass and people sitting in offices who do nothing but push paper all day. There is no need for most of this waste. Private companies can be contracted to cut grass at a fraction of the cost the County spends on employees, equipment, and retirements for Government workers. Most of the paperwork that is passed around is simply "find work" excuses. Almost all of the school curriculum is set by the State, not local school boards so what are they really doing? Working our way up the chain we can easily find hundreds of thousands of workers doing completely unneeded jobs and wasting money. Take the IRS. We spend hundreds of millions of dollars every year just in the enforcement arm of the IRS. So we spend massive amounts of money for very little return. Switch to the 'fair tax' and suddenly we don't need an IRS because everyone who spends money to live is paying taxes. No need to have an enforcement division because everyone is paying.

lol, is the best gloating you Progressives can offer? Funny stuff right there. Yes, you got to keep the wonderful Harry Red, you must feel very good about that, lol.

Actually, semantics are pretty relevant here. He said some people should not vote. And he's quite correct. I know a few people that shouldn't vote. And they don't. Because they know they shouldn't. It's not that they don't want to. They're doing the responsible thing and not voting when they know nothing about politics and don't give a sh t. He never said that some people should not be able to vote. Just that some people shouldn't vote. Big difference. And how do you know the desires of his heart? By reading the text he posted on the internet? It is not about the desire of his heart, it is the actual words he said. He said some people should not vote, I said the exact same thing, trying to make it "sound" different is simply silly. As usual this is all about Joe trying to play "gotcha" and later getting his words tossed back at him and he is not man enough to admit it.

Being as you seem not able to understand how a city budget works you can't understand any of this anyway. Maybe after you start payign things like property taxes and get curious how that money is spent you can understand these things. Then again you already admitted you are very lazy and still living at home right? You have a long way to go if so.

A simpler truth has never been said....

Yes, even Democrats should go out and vote. That is exactly what I was saying as well when IWS jumped me. My point was that people who don't pay taxes will never be concerned about the cost of the things they vote for. Take for example Government run healthcare. Most Americans pay little or no taxes so why not vote for people who will pass that when you know you will never have to pay for it? The only real difference between what I said and what IWS said is who said it, as usual the double standard, but it is not like this is new, I just like pointing out the hypocrisy when it appears.

But I still have to spend money to do that. You think I have that kind of dough in this economy? Pssh. Well you called yourself lazy, you will never make good money until you get past being lazy.

So are we talking about covering the extra cost of fighting fires outside of the city or how the city can extort the most money possible from County residents without doing anything to get it? Yes, if the point is to make as much money as possible then you are correct, it is better to get $75 from every resident in the County no matter if they ever get fire services or not. But I was not talking about how the City can make the most money, I was talking about how the city can cover the "COST" of fighting fires. Are you just acting stupid or do you really not understand this very basic point? I already covered how budgets are made yearly kid, not my fault you can't retain lessons already given, you need to pay attention and read everything each time before you reply if you can't keep up with the conversation. They already have trucks, firefighters, fire chiefs, dispatch, fire stations....all the things that make up a firefighting service are already there for the city, what they "NEED" is the ability to cover expenses to fight fires outside the City, and I agree this is completely reasonable for them to get. So how much extra does it cost to respond to the fire of a County resident? There is certainly extra gas, the small increase of pay from sitting idol to responding to a actual call must be paid to the firefighters, so you will be looking at around $40 to $50 of actual extra cost to the city for a basic fire call. I am sure the city wants to make a profit from the calls and getting money from many people they will never have to respond to helps considerably to give the City a lot of free money comming in but I also don't see anything wrong with charging around $500.00 to those who did not pay up front. You just don't ever pay attention. The FD already existed, their yearly expenses to operate the FD is already covered by the city budget every year. It is not "MAGIC" it is called a city budget. They have all the money they need for city fire department from the city taxes, what we are talking about is how much more they need to offer services to other people in the County.

I am glad I live in a more conservative setting, it sounds like the "modern" peopel are aut of control, lol. Rainbow parties? Not sure I even want to know what that is, all that stuff sounds pretty scary to be honest. Most of the kids I am around stay pretty busy too. You know, thinking of the early days also reminds me that kids worked their behinds off on the farms to survive too so when they were done the biggest thing on their minds was most likely sleep, lol. We need to keep them exausted

exactly. and he isn't denying that TJ. There is a BIG difference between 'some people should not vote' and 'some people should not be allowed to vote' BIG difference. Kinda like socialism. Yes, we should all, by choice, help out those around us in need. It's a BIG difference when the Gov't starts demanding that we have to help others, and starts taking our money to do so. Semantics, his desire in his heart was the same, some people not voting, the execution of the desire was never the point, it is now just an excuse to try and get out of what he said. Joe in his heart believes some people should not vote, and that was my point.

You know, I have to think back to a lot of history books and stories of how early Americans lived and even before that how early Europeans lived and one thing is pretty clear, our modern world where everyone has seperate bedrooms and bathrooms and such was not the norm for most of the human existence on planet Earth. The fronteer west had the average home being a big single room structure, so it stands to reason that kids would see a lot more then than they do now......at least there was the possibility and not only that but most kids grew up around animans and they definately knew what made babies. Today sex is more 'flashy' though. It is in your face all the time and not just an expression of love anymore, I think that is why we see more sexual activities at younger ages these days. I personally thought it was close to the end of the world when I found out kids were sending each other naked pictures of themselves on their phones, there was even a couple cases of it in my home town recently so kids are definately getting way out there on the edge of sexual behaviors.

I remember you one time saying I was a bad person for saying only people who pay taxes should be allowed to vote. You claimed I was trying to advocate a "ruling class" and limiting who can vote was very bad. So I agree with you and want everyone to vote and suddenly "YOU" are advocating a "ruling class" and wanting to limit who is allowed to vote? Flip flop much? This is why the ignorant should be seen and not heard. This isn't the same thing and I never said everyone should vote. I said everyone should have the right to vote, you only want property owners to have the right to vote. Big difference. Dumbass. Don't play the Bender two step Joe, you just said some people should not vote. You are now playing semantics, either everyone should vote or they should not, you say some people should not vote, the reason for your vote restriction was different than mine but the concept is exactly the same only this time it is you who is saying some people should not vote so I guess that makes it okay, lol Your words, not mine Joe........................hypocrite. Dumbass. You want to take the "RIGHT" to vote from people. I said that uninformed, ignorant people shouldn't vote, not that they should lose the right to do so. The fact that you can't or won't see the difference is why I lump you in the category of those who shouldn't vote. If "some" people in your opinion should not be allowed to vote, it is the exact same thing no matter what semantics you try to play Joe. The only difference is what reasons we each use to justify limiting their ability to vote. You say you would restrict the ability to vote based on what you see as "stupid" while I said voting should be limited to those who pay taxes (I never said anything about property by the way, just to keep you on track, not sure where you got that). So the "ruling class" according to IWS is those who IWS believes is smart while my idea of the "ruling class" are those who pay for Government to function. Same thing, different justifications. Not everyone should vote. Your words Joe, not mine, lol I never said "some" people should not be allowed to vote. I said some people shouldn't vote. Kinda like fat people shouldn't wear spandex. Doesn't mean I think they shouldn't be allowed, they just shouldn't do it. Nice lie, Dumbass. Lie? I used your actual words Joe. The only lie is from you when you change from day to day what your possitions are just so you can take a shot at me my flip-flop friend, lol. Let me quote you again: Not everyone should vote. You said it Joe, now be man enough to admit it or ch!ckensh!t enough to simply run away from it, stop trying to lie your way out of it though because that is just pathetic. We all know you couldn't have done well on the writing section of the SAT but I see you obviously didn't do very well on the critical reading part either. Not everyone should vote.[/u Not a lot there to understand or misunderstand Joe, you said it, now your trying to sidestep taking responsibility for your own words. All I am doing is pointing out a fact that you said some people should not vote.

It's up to you, but I'll throw in another quarter if you do It all goes along with Joker's paraphilia problem.

I remember you one time saying I was a bad person for saying only people who pay taxes should be allowed to vote. You claimed I was trying to advocate a "ruling class" and limiting who can vote was very bad. So I agree with you and want everyone to vote and suddenly "YOU" are advocating a "ruling class" and wanting to limit who is allowed to vote? Flip flop much? This is why the ignorant should be seen and not heard. This isn't the same thing and I never said everyone should vote. I said everyone should have the right to vote, you only want property owners to have the right to vote. Big difference. Dumbass. Don't play the Bender two step Joe, you just said some people should not vote. You are now playing semantics, either everyone should vote or they should not, you say some people should not vote, the reason for your vote restriction was different than mine but the concept is exactly the same only this time it is you who is saying some people should not vote so I guess that makes it okay, lol Your words, not mine Joe........................hypocrite. Dumbass. You want to take the "RIGHT" to vote from people. I said that uninformed, ignorant people shouldn't vote, not that they should lose the right to do so. The fact that you can't or won't see the difference is why I lump you in the category of those who shouldn't vote. If "some" people in your opinion should not be allowed to vote, it is the exact same thing no matter what semantics you try to play Joe. The only difference is what reasons we each use to justify limiting their ability to vote. You say you would restrict the ability to vote based on what you see as "stupid" while I said voting should be limited to those who pay taxes (I never said anything about property by the way, just to keep you on track, not sure where you got that). So the "ruling class" according to IWS is those who IWS believes is smart while my idea of the "ruling class" are those who pay for Government to function. Same thing, different justifications. Not everyone should vote. Your words Joe, not mine, lol I never said "some" people should not be allowed to vote. I said some people shouldn't vote. Kinda like fat people shouldn't wear spandex. Doesn't mean I think they shouldn't be allowed, they just shouldn't do it. Nice lie, Dumbass. Lie? I used your actual words Joe. The only lie is from you when you change from day to day what your possitions are just so you can take a shot at me my flip-flop friend, lol. Let me quote you again: Not everyone should vote. You said it Joe, now be man enough to admit it or ch!ckensh!t enough to simply run away from it, stop trying to lie your way out of it though because that is just pathetic.

Your first mistake is the source of your information, the pdf is not an independent report, it is an internal document so it is worthless. Offer some information independent of the city and maybe I will spend some time looking at it. Let's go back to the basics. As I already pointed out and you seem unable to understand, all the costs of operating that fire department are already completely covered by the city. They use average fire calls from prior years with a percentage extra (usually 10%) just to be sure they can fully operate all year long. Any "extra" money the city gets from the County residents is all profit, they already have all their costs covered so it does not matter if they get 1 person or 1,000 people to pay, it is all over and above their costs and pure profit. What you are talking about is using scare tactics to extort a massive windfall in profit for the city Joker, nice if they can get it that way I suppose, but that again goes against my point that firefighters should not be run like the strong arm element of a mafia.

as usual, the Progressives believe everyone but them are stupid and incapable of understanding things. While you are crying Bender try to remember that the 'peons" you are so disrespectful to are wanting jobs, not Government handouts and empty promises. They all seem to understand something Progressives don't, and that is jobs come from the same private sector you progressives always attack. They also know that as long as you Progressives are attacking the job creators, there is little motivation for them to actually create jobs. Progressives punish job creators, and that is why each time they are in power, more jobs are killed. I agree with hugo in this part, gridlock is good because at least the business community knows what the rules are going to be for awhile instead of the constantly changing set of rules the Democrats keep offering.

You mean like you saying Stewart is a big person on the same level as the President when he is not? All I can do is keep telling the truth and keeping things in the realm of reality kid, if that means the truth must be spoken over and over to keep the conversation in reality...then so be it. Where did I say "everyone" kid? Another lie by you inserted into the conversation to give you an excuse to flame? This style of yours to lie is very childish kid. Obama should not avoid anyone kid, I never said he should avoid people, just that as President of the United States he has to take control of these things. I guess you don't know but it is common practice for strong public personalities to set limits and restrictions on these little guys before they will appear on their shows to prevent these kinds of things from happening. They will actually have an appearance contract. Obama went on this idiots show and didn't even bother to put him in his place with the same kind of appearance contract even Oprah requires before she will allow an interview. The fact that Stewart took advantage of Obama's lack of planning and went so far to even be completely disrespectful shows just how small Stewart really is. Bull, any idiot can see that when measured side by side, the respect level between comedian on a barely watched comedy show and the President of the United States "SHOULD" be a world apart. Stewart treated Obama as beneath him, that was the disrespect. And being so immature you missed the point in your desperation to defend your little entertainment god Stewart. Stewart twists the truth in politics just enough to make it funny, well funny to the immature crowd who watches his show. What "corrupt system" did Stewart think needed to be removed? The only thing Obama did not do is put the private healthcare companies out of business...is that what Stewart was complaining about? And if so, show me the direct quote from Obama saying he would put them out of business for Stewart to hold him accountable for? Oh, and Stewart calling him "dude" like a nobody, that would really hurt Obama's campaign when even a nobody comedian stuck on the cartoon channel does not have any respect for Obama as the President either. Just loop him calling Obama dude and timid over and over, who wants a "timid dude" as President?

Speaking of crying, how bout them crying ass Progressives who got their behinds crushed recently.......funny as hell.