Disclaimer

I don't really consider myself "skilled", but I often use the rear brake and trail brake with it into a turn. Right or wrong, I can feel the bike settle in the lean if I apply a little pressure on the rear sometimes -- and it doesn't stand the bike up on me.

Which part of her is virgin? The back of her knee?

That's the tradeoff. In public, I have to look like I'm pwned to reap the benefits in private. Quid pro quo

PM jbot. He has the appropriate forms for you to fill out to get the poll removed.

Man-sized hunger requires man-sized portions. I dunno I can eat 2-12" subs from Subway in a sitting too. My record at CiCi's pizza is 25 slices + breadsticks + brownies + cinnamon rolls. I don't do that competition anymore though.

The bruises on my hand are nothing compared to the ones on her face. *I'm kidding, hitting a lady is a no-no, outside the bedroom.

Would you believe a very complex pulley system?

I had two sandwiches today for lunch, made to my specifications -- not prepared by me. I had 6 BLTs last night, whilst I watched TV. When I was finished the plate was cleaned, and placed in the dishwasher. During all this, I never left my chair.

I changed it for the fact that I mentioned your 10% vs. 75% was as unrealistic as someone shopping for a Vette and getting bumped to a Cobalt because of taxes. It's an unrealistic example. No, see, you're supply-side economics model is flawed. Supply Side economics don't work. If you search ORDN for posts by me and the terms "Supply Side Economics" - we've discussed this before. More money in your pocket doesn't necessarily mean increased spending - that's a myth. Why do we even need someone to do CCI studies then? Just think about it, if you had an extra $100/month... you'd just go out and spend that on stuff? You'd change your lifestyle to figure out someway to spend that money each month? Everyone would do that? I doubt it. And once again, I dunno why people pin taxes on Obama. People that do that are wrong, just plain wrong. Tax bills in 2009 at lowest level since 1950 http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2010-05-10-taxes_N.htm

I don't understand how that defends your argument? Regardless of taxes, I spend my money based on what I can afford. Taxes, Insurance, etc all factor into that decision. 10% vs. 75% is a pretty drastic and unrealistic example as going from a Cobalt to a Corvette. If the sales tax doubled from 6.25% to 12.5%, it might make me switch a Buick Enclave to a Chevy Traverse, or step down from a loaded Malibu to a base-model. But it's not going to affect my choice to buy a car, period. Just what KIND of car.

My buying habits for consumables don't change depending on my taxes. Key word: consumables. If I need a new car, I'll get a new car. But, I might only get a Cobalt instead of a Corvette. I'm still buying a new car, companies are still profiting, supply chain is still necessary and value adding. If the sales tax in your county was cut in half, you're telling me you'd go out and spend twice as much now? Bullspit.

Yea, and it's really cramping my pimp-handedness.

Yea, but your initial post to get a reaction was attributed to it being an 'Obama' thing with the programs listed (though the bailouts were signed under Bush Jr.). Bush entered office with a surplus, and Obama inherited a crumbling economy and a deficit. So, yea... the money has to come from somewhere, too bad the guy before Obama spent it all without replacing it. Now everyone wants to go back to the stereotypical-Democrat argument that they raise taxes. Well, you can't have a balanced budget and not pay for it somewhere. But that's the card "fiscal conservatives" want to play. They want reduced taxes, they want balanced budgets, and depending on their audience they'll flip flop on what programs they want to cut and blame the 'other side' that the programs were being cut. There are numerous examples (if you'd like to see them) of Republicans that spoke out against TARP money, but then would go to ribbon cutting ceremonies for projects paid for by TARP money in their districts. So, "TARP money is bad, unless it directly affects me - then I'll take it, but it's still bad"... So, I dunno how you can maintain programs at their current levels AND cut taxes. That's in direct opposition. They're talking out of both sides of their mouth. Not only that, but on the tax thing... I don't know anyone on this board that's affected by any tax increase directly because of Obama. In fact, I'd wager that 95% of the members on here, all else equal, actually had increased take-home pay when Obama took office. Unless there's WAY more people in a higher tax bracket on here than let on - $250k and above.

There isn't a "winner" and "loser"... there's no "defeat", it's not arguing. It's an adult discussion. I haz a sad you nibbled at my bait, but won't get hooked.

Sure you do... you keep replying in the thread. C'mon, convince me, I've very open-minded and easily persuaded with the right sources to validate claims. "We'll see" and "Just wait" are the best you can do? You better come harder than that if you want to opine in a political thread.

I want to not have to bang the same piece of snatch for the rest of my life @ 20. :glws:

I don't know how you can rest on blanket-statements like that? Taxes will increase. Maybe? For who? Why? Cost of living... where's your reasoning? Quality of life... as defined by? Cost of living? Location? What?

Can't be any worse than what happened in the last 8... But, proceed and explain your cause-and-effect along with your citations that validate your thoughts from experts in the field. Unless you're a gov't spending expert?

Every debate goes into "fear mongering"-mode Just wait... seriously? What kind of response is that? People put forecasts and predictions together in order to make better decisions in the present. I don't know how anyone can buy the "just wait" argument. It has no teeth. Your kids (if you have any) will grow up to be gangbangers and drug dealers.... just wait. That argument is just as solid as any other "just wait" argument.

Snap!

That's funny, I call her.... whenever you're outta town.

Not a range rover sport. Start at $74k for the supercharged engine. http://www.landrover.com/us/en/rr/range-rover-sport/build/#__build_and_price_top Why would you get any lesser Land Rover? That'd just be shallow and pedantic.

Do you even know what you're doing young'un?

I'll bite, I'm in the mood to get into a moderate debate today. Citation needed. Show me how you're worse off with Obama change rather than Bush change? Has your paycheck shrunk since 2009? The recession started when Bush was in office and Obama has since reduced your 2009 tax burden. So, everyone touting "those silly 'tax and spend' democrats" -- proof is necessary. Unless you're making over $250k, then I feel SOOO bad for you and your slightly increased tax liability. God forbid you have to suffer with an Escalade instead of a Land Rover. My gosh, what will the neighbors think of you?

I'd have to wash it first, or he'd just be tasting your lipstick.