Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zzpat who wrote (1038233)	11/11/2017 4:16:15 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1575608

you believe in hell do your lib friends know that

To: zzpat who wrote (1038233)	11/11/2017 4:39:23 PM
From: locogringo	1 Recommendation Recommended By Mick Mørmøny Respond to of 1575608

You are liar. Go to hell. SI TOS frowns upon such language and personal attacks. un-American patriot got banned for talking like a hateful partisan hack.

To: zzpat who wrote (1038233)	11/11/2017 7:23:49 PM
From: Broken_Clock	1 Recommendation Recommended By Mick Mørmøny Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575608

I thought Hillary supporters didn't believe in God. Apparently you do. Go to hell. I wonder how God will judge your blind support of the war criminals like Bill, Hillary and Obomber? what's your excuse going o be/

To: zzpat who wrote (1038233)

11/11/2017 8:28:23 PM

From: James Seagrove

3 Recommendations

Recommended By
FJB
locogringo
Mick Mørmøny

Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1575608

You have a serious problem explaining your poorly thought out positions.

To: zzpat who wrote (44638)	11/11/2017 2:42:08 PM
From: Lane3	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) of 44689

I asked a question that wasn't framed in a manner that made you "feel" good. You continue to insinuate your imaginary bogeyman into my position on taxes. How do you presume to do that? Do you always go around informing people what it is that they think about this or that? The problem with the framing of your question had nothing to do with my view on the subject. The problem was that the question was inapt. you can pretend you're engaged in an honest and open debate only if you're willing to let our children pay for what we spend. So, the measure of one's openness and honesty is that he take a particular position? That is a total contradiction. Being open and honest means, instead, being receptive to the panoply of positions and to evaluate them objectively. And being willing to let our children pay for what we spend is your preferred position? Hmmmm. Surely not. Given a choice between tax cuts that create massive debt or tax increases that reduce the deficits and eventually the debt which do you prefer? You did not address why "tax increases that reduce deficits" is the only alternative to "tax cuts that create massive debt." Or, conversely why "tax cuts that create massive debt" is the only alternative to "tax increases that reduce deficits." My judgment of false dichotomy still stands.