JuicedH22

Maybe he "overhyped" expectations to his family/friends? "OSU games are so awesome! So packed that people have to sit on the steps and in people's laps" "Everyone leaves the game with no voice left from cheering the whole game!" "They do the wave for the entirety of every timeout with no breaks in any section." "Girls flash their tits at every touchdown!!!" "They throw cash in the air instead of confetti after the first TD!" "The water fountains pour beer instead of water!" After the game: "Uh, dude, none of that stuff happened" "Yea, this game just wasn't nearly as good, lame atmosphere compared to the past"

That's two weeks in a row with great picks/calls for you!

And my Bearcats move into the top 25!

Eagles are one of my favorite non-bengals nfl teams due to the large number of UC players they have.

BTW, 3 of the 16 undefeated teams in college football are from BrOhio. OSU, UC, OU

Nice!

That didnt work out well for you. nailed it. Another shootout, those games are pretty exciting to watch. and for my bearcat troll comment of the week: OSU beat Miami 56-10 UC beat Miami 52-14 Does that mean that UC is only slightly behind OSU using ricer football math? :gabe: And holy shit did OSU go on a scoring spree in the 2nd half...

Its no mistake that the democrats have spent their entire effort in going after Romney 'personally' and not on policies/performance... they are VERY good at getting at hte average person emotionally, and telling people want they want to hear... What I find most annoying... they are STILL playing the bush card... WTF! "Romney is the next bush, back to the policies that got us here.... blah blah blah" And I still contend it was the DEMOCRATIC congress that was the problem...

I dont watch Fox news, that is hilarious though. :lolguy:

I completely agree, and said as such.

No, I am 'arguing' the 47% he was talking about, also based on words and references he used, is DIFFERENT than the 47% of that you FEEL he was talking about also based on words and references. The bottom line is, the people I am 95% sure he WAS talking about, is NOT the group you referenced, but the group I referenced... it makes more sense that way, based on the subject. That is precisely what i am saying... and I am saying he was referencing hte former, not the latter. No, I am not arguing against poor people.... You are doing the typical partisan thing of twisting words. Dont. I am saying that Mitt was suggesting to his audience that the 50% of americans that make up 2.7% of the overall Tax Burden, and live off of goverment funded programs like WELFARE are not his priority, that he is focused on the 50% of Americans that comprise 97.3% of our overall Tax burden. That HE can't convince them that his fiscal policy can make their lives better by reducing taxes, because they pay so little as it is. And by 'entitlements' I am willing to bet he was referring to welfare programs... not retirees and the elderly...

Oh, before I go, I was planning on using these, with some points around htem, but I will just "leave them here" for now, haha. http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?height=480&width=800&id=UEMPMEAN&scale=Left&range=Max&cosd=1948-01-01&coed=2012-08-01&line_color=%230000ff&link_values=false&line_style=Solid&mark_type=NONE&mw=4&lw=1&ost=-99999&oet=99999&mma=0&fml=a&fq=Monthly&fam=avg&fgst=lin&transformation=lin&vintage_date=2012-09-10&revision_date=2012-09-10 http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/labor-force-participation-rate-chart-apr-2012.jpg http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/foodstamp.jpg http://www.pgm-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/US-National-Debt-Chart-2012_LG-530x800.jpeg

debate over for me now, just had a "fire alarm" assignment dropped in my lap.... bye bye CR (didnt want to look like I was ignoring you)

I think the reality is, the "47%" you think he was referencing is different than the "47%" I think he was referencing. I am saying he was referencing the near 50% of americans in the lower half of the taxpayer income level.... You think he was talking about hte 50% who dont pay "income tax"... You see the difference? And how you can build an argument depending on how you infer what he was saying? That is my point.

Clearly, we are talking income tax.... Didnt take you long to start tossing out insults... I am not upset at all a progressive taxation system, Its more upsetting that the vast majority of americans dont understand that, or the term itself. In fact they would look you blank in the face when you say "progressive taxation". It is much easier to hear a liberal say "the rich need to pay more taxes, the burden is on hte middle class!" like the top 5% of americans get away with not paying taxes.... On the amount of taxation, and my point (keep in mind I said 'nearly' no tax at all) as I referenced they cover only 3% of the tax burden which to me is a very small number. And the salary is less than $33k, NOT $50k

Yup, it looks horrible, even though that was not the intent, to the average american, or anyone who didnt know what he was referencing, it looks HORRIBLE and the dems seized the opportunity and ran with it.

No, this was his point: http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d149/teedawgmu/whopaystaxes2.jpg He is referencing the near 50% of americans that pay nearly NO TAX AT ALL. Keep in mind the "rich need to pay more" is just propoganda BULLSHIT... IRS Numbers: Top 5% of Americans (making > $159,619) cover 58.72% of tax burden The Bottom 50% of Americans (which are making <$33,048) cover 2.7% of tax burden SO that >$50k number you thru out is bullshit also. That "47%" of americans number he used was referencing that he can't convince those americans that his ideas are better, because they RELY and LIKE all the government spending programs, becaues they are LIVING off of them. And you cant convince them that he can reduce their tax burden, because they HAVE NONE. He was in a room full of people sharing the frustration that democratic liberals love the idea of large government programs which tax the average american, to pay for service for those that live off government programs. Sure it is 'red meat' feeding as it includes elderly/veterans/teenagers... and of course he was pandering to his audience... that's politics. Because 16% of our taxes go to unemployment and welfare... nearly as much as the united states defense budget! (notice social security and medicare have their own pie piece, so that is NOT included in what is annoying to most fiscal conservatives) http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_JTd2KOgmF9A/SxYYc0ZM-zI/AAAAAAAABAk/1chrDtV_u8Y/s1600/Fy2010_spending_by_category.jpg

This keeps getting talked about.... Do you know what the 47% was that he was referencing? And why he said what he said? (please, try to answer objectively) No, they cant... dont say stupid shit.

Pun intended?

Yea, that looks worse..... what about shaving it and relocating the tank fill?

Hey, you're famous! http://www.lsxtv.com/news/swap-insanity-turbo-lq4-powered-lexus-is300/ came up on my facebook (lsxtv's page), I knew it was you as soon as I saw the title "LS meets Luxury"

I get that, but AFTER finding out it was a joke, and the guy was disabled, you would htink she would say "oh, my bad" in the least, maybe acknowledge foot inserted in mouth... but nope.

that is what I think is hte sad part... Not that she made the comment and "talked shit" but after finding out, she didnt even apologize, instead played the victim herself, WTF?

I should be surprised at everyone taking the side of the troll, but I'm not. How do you know that isnt the case? Having grown up with a family member who struggled with her weight, as well as a wife who has been fighting off the weight from 2 kids within 2 years... I can sympothize with this woman. I grew up watching my mom go from diet plan to diet plan, weight watchers, working out, eathing healthy, etc... and while weight would go up and down as she worked on it, it was tough on her I know, down right depresssing I am sure. Its not easy for everyone to lose weight, but it sure is easy to say it is. Not saying that weight lose to a 'public' ideal weight isnt impossible, but I know without a doubt it is hard to do. But furthermore, SO WHAT? To the point of the country turning into a bunch of pussies, I would agree but can be viewed from the other end as well. You think she is a bad role model if she is overweight?!?! You really think some kids are going to go "I want to be fat, because the news anchor is!" or even use it as an excuse to be? And why just pick on overweight women if it is really a role model in the public eye kind of thing? The number of overweight men in front of a camera outnumber women 20 fold, but no one is saying they are a bad role model, lol.

I will definitely have to take you up on that the next time I am up in Columbus. I wouldnt mind talking in more detail regarding the PM I had sent anyway. Maybe I will try to make it up to the C&C the following weekend as well, if my schedule permits. I will say, seeing successes like yours, is excpetionally motivating to me. I just got to do something about this corporate monster that is General Electric that wants to consume my life... and I dont think GE is the right path for the destination I want to be!