I took him at his word that he meant "everything" when he said "everything".
i did...her earning potential dwarfs everyone who has ever posted on AFN.

now where's my Slurpee?:rant:

Wrong. Davis never went to school as a kid (his was a vaudeville family, always on the go), but he certainly wasn't "illiterate his entire life."

I think that Sammy really went out of his way to make
sure no one knew he was functionally Illiterate.Oh yeah he
could sign his name and knew a few simple words and phrases.
I noticed Wikepedia didn't mention it.
But I remember,late in his Life,he did that Sanford & Son Episode
so other kids wouldn't face the hidden shame of simply
knowing how to read & Write.Jackie Gleason never attended school,either
but was a whiz at Crossword Puzzles and the Really hard ones
like the Times.
He made a pledge to learn a new word every single day.
The Movie - The Toy - had a Dictionary that probably really
belonged to him.It was about as big as a little Euro hotel room
fridge.

i did...her earning potential dwarfs everyone who has ever posted on AFN.

Why? Paris has no talent whatsoever. She is only famous for being rich.


now where's my Slurpee?:rant:

You will have to talk to him:
http://simpsons.online.fr/apu-mug.gif


:thumbs:

Why? Paris has no talent whatsoever. She is only famous for being rich.
The point is, she makes almost 2/3 of a million bucks a day. He didn't say she deserved it.

The point is, she makes almost 2/3 of a million bucks a day. He didn't say she deserved it.

No, you misunderstand. He said she still has potential to earn millions if you took away all her wealth. I am asking why, since she has no talent and is only famous for her wealth. Take that away and what does she have?

No, you misunderstand. He said she still has potential to earn millions if you took away all her wealth. I am asking why, since she has no talent and is only famous for her wealth. That that away and what does she have?
Even if she lost all her wealth she'd still be famous. She could make thousands selling her urine samples.

Even if she lost all her wealth she'd still be famous. She could make thousands selling her urine samples.
Exactly. She got famous because of her wealth, but now that she is famous she wouldn't just be automatically un-famous if she wasn't rich anymore.

Yes, they definately should pay taxes on it. It is income.
They didn't earn that money originally, it was gifted to them when you died.

OK, we shall consider it a taxable "gift". Shouldn't ALL inheritance be taxed then? We wouldn't want children to be living off of their parents hard work and success.

All taxes and all government expenditure are a "distribution of wealth". Most of it redistributes money from the poor and middle classes to the wealthy.

All governing is about nothing more than controlling the "distribution of wealth".

The estate tax is for the benefit of our society.

Paris Hilton can get a damn job like everyone else. She has a job. Paris attends parties and gets paid thousands of dollars just to go. Now that sounds like a lot of hard work partying with all those rich people and hanging out with celebrities! :rolleyes:

Oh sure. There were no natural disasters during Clinton's time in the White House.

Let's see.... I've got a list of 16 major natural disasters that occurred between 1993 and 2001, all competently handled by Clinton's FEMA.



Interestingly enough, there have been only two natural disasters in the US during Bush's tenure, and the ONE that was (mis)handled by Bush's "new and improved" version of FEMA is considered the WORST natural disaster response in this country's history.





Interesting. You'd deny a sick child a "free lunch" of healthcare, but if you needed a free lunch, you'd be right there in front, shouting for it. Way to go, SMW!



I know a lot about a lot of things, SMW. Because I read, I think, I listen, I research. How 'bout you?

No, don't bother answering. Your absurd Bush-blindness/insistence that Clinton's FEMA was never put to the test makes my point quite clearly.

:thumbs:

You may be smart, but you're a silly woman, Frannie. If you're such a big THINKER, why do you feel it necessary to search the web in a quest to post figures in an attempt to back up your opinions?

To try and prove Clinton's administration (and FEMA) handled bigger natural disasters than Rita and Katrina is absurd.

I know a lot about a lot of things too, Frannie. But most of what I know is based on personal experience... like having friends and family displaced by the hurricanes. And living in a city that housed thousands of evacuees and seeing how FEMA bent over backwards trying to help them. Did they make mistakes? Absolutely. Did they learn from responding to what amounts to be the biggest natural disaster they've EVER handled? I'm sure they did.

I don't claim to know EVERYTHING, but I know what I experience. As opposed to you, who know what you READ.

All you liberals have at least one thing in common... if the administration in power is Republican, then they're totally to blame for everything bad that happens in this country. If the Democrats are in power, they're handicapped by what the last Republican administration did or didn't do. Trying to argue that "Clinton was better than Bush" is not only juvenile, it's a total waste of time. In other words, small-minded people who custom-make their opinions to fit their own agenda.

"I BELIEVE IT, SO IT MUST BE TRUE!"

Even when FACTS prove otherwise.

Don't bother responding. I'm sure you must have more important things to do than google liberal websites.

SMW

Find out here.

http://www.wqad.com/Global/link.asp?L=259460

(DF, sorry to report... Ron Paul came in absolutely LAST for me. Guess I have to keep looking, eh?)


:hula:

Well... Those tests aren't exactly accurate... I keep getting different results, even on the same tests. :@@: And on one, HILARY came in first. :eek:

Although on second thought I do know that immigration is an important issue for you... And Ron Paul definitely doesn't agree with you on that.

Yeah, I'm sure different sites give different conclusions. If mine ever came back Hillary, I'd have to move.

;)
SMW

OK, we shall consider it a taxable "gift". Shouldn't ALL inheritance be taxed then? We wouldn't want children to be living off of their parents hard work and success.

Taxing Inheritance is reasonable.But the practice can be manipulated
and result in an effective rate that is nothing short of
confiscatory.In the 60's wealthy marginal rates reached almost 90%.

Here's what bugs me about the tax system. They tax your paycheck. OK, fine. Pay utility bills... pay taxes (all kinda taxes). Then you buy a new car with the money you saved out of your taxed paycheck... they tax that. Then you buy gas, oil and tires for the new car... taxed as well. Drive the new car to pick up your sweetie and go out to dinner? Pick up some flowers... pay tax. Then the dinner bill comes... more tax.

I figure out of every dollar I earn, I probably clear about ten cents. Just about enough to pay for my insurance (auto, home, health, life).

Whoever said life was fair??

;)
SMW

Here's what bugs me about the tax system. They tax your paycheck. OK, fine. Pay utility bills... pay taxes (all kinda taxes). Then you buy a new car with the money you saved out of your taxed paycheck... they tax that. Then you buy gas, oil and tires for the new car... taxed as well. Drive the new car to pick up your sweetie and go out to dinner? Pick up some flowers... pay tax. Then the dinner bill comes... more tax.

I figure out of every dollar I earn, I probably clear about ten cents. Just about enough to pay for my insurance (auto, home, health, life).

Whoever said life was fair??

;)
SMW


You for got my favorite.

Which bill containsthe following?

a line charge.
911 service fee
TIF reimbursement
Fereral Universal Service fee
State Universal Service fee
Expanded Local Calling Service fee
Municiple Charge
Taxes:
Federal, Local Charges
Federal, non-regulated
State & Local, Local Charges
State & Local, non-regulated
Sales Tax







The friggin PHONE BILL

Taxing Inheritance is reasonable.But the practice can be manipulated
and result in an effective rate that is nothing short of
confiscatory.In the 60's wealthy marginal rates reached almost 90%.

I don't believe that taxing inheritance is unreasonable, only unfair the way it is currently administered (and that it should be done equally).

If I leave my kids one million, and you leave your kids two million, under current laws... only your's will be required to pay the estate tax on it.

Of course, I think our current income tax structure is an abomination to what our founding fathers would have wanted anyway.

You may be smart, but you're a silly woman, Frannie. If you're such a big THINKER, why do you feel it necessary to search the web in a quest to post figures in an attempt to back up your opinions?

First of all, it was your nutty OPINION (below)

Originally Posted by smartmouthwoman
Of course, it helps that no major hurricanes struck, displacing hundreds of thousands of people while Clinton was president either. All govt agencies work well until they're put to the test.

That caused me to post the FACTS for someone who is as loudmouthed and opinionated as she is ignorant and uninformed. There were, in fact, four major hurricanes (and 12 other major natural disasters) while Clinton was president. So, your claim that “no major hurricanes struck” during Clinton’s time in office is simply wrong.

If you want to base your completely uninformed argument on the number of people displaced, well, you're wrong again. But rather than offer an ignorant opinion, allow me to respond to that with the FACTS, as well.

Hurricane Floyd, Sept. 1999: In preparation for a potentially catastrophic landfall, more than one million Florida residents were told to evacuate, of which 272,000 were in Miami-Dade County. U.S. President Bill Clinton declared a federal state of emergency in both Florida and Georgia in anticipation of the storm's approach. As the storm turned to the north, more people were evacuated as a progressively larger area was threatened. The massive storm caused the largest peacetime evacuation ever in the U.S., with around 2.6 million evacuating coastal areas in Florida, Georgia, and the Carolinas. --Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Floyd)

So yeah, Clinton’s FEMA not only had to take on Floyd and deal with several million evacuees, IT WAS THERE BEFORE THE HURRICANE HIT. Unlike Bush’s FEMA.

To try and prove Clinton's administration (and FEMA) handled bigger natural disasters than Rita and Katrina is absurd.

Um. I think I already have proved that, dear. Maybe you should pull your head out of your ass and reread the facts/data I’ve provided.

I know a lot about a lot of things too, Frannie. But most of what I know is based on personal experience... like having friends and family displaced by the hurricanes.

Um.

I was born and raised in Beaumont, SMW. I daresay more hurricanes have hit Beaumont than Dallas over the years (as you’ve already pointed out, there have been no hurricanes in Dallas.) I lived through Hurricane Carla and the resulting tornados it spawned in my neighborhood…

Hurricane Carla (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Carla) was one of two Category 5 tropical cyclones during the 1961 Atlantic hurricane season. It struck the Texas coast as a Category 4 hurricane, becoming one of the most powerful storms to ever strike the United States and the strongest ever to hit Texas. The storm caused over $2 billion (2005 US dollars) in damages. Carla still remains the strongest storm to strike the Texas coast. Beaumont suffered tornadoes and massive flooding due to poor drainage. --Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaumont,_Texas#Severe_weather_events)

You, on the other hand, base your vast knowledge of hurricanes and FEMA responses on “friends and family displaced by the hurricanes.”

Well, I can certainly see how my own personal experience having the roof ripped off and trees smash two walls and several feet of floodwater fill the house is trumped by the chats you’ve had with friends. :rolleyes:

I don't claim to know EVERYTHING, but I know what I experience. As opposed to you, who know what you READ.

“Experience?” Tell me again how many major hurricanes have slammed your house?

Trying to argue that "Clinton was better than Bush" is not only juvenile, it's a total waste of time.

Aren’t you arguing that Bush’s response to Katrina was better than Clinton’s response to… well, just about anything?

In other words, small-minded people who custom-make their opinions to fit their own agenda.

Let’s go over this one more time. I’ve presented FACTS and offered documentation to support them. You’ve offered small-minded, nutty OPINIONS. Do you have any FACTS to back up your “Bush’s FEMA is Better!” agenda, or is this more of your “experience” chatting with friends who’ve been in a hurricane?

Even when FACTS prove otherwise.

What facts? Let's see some. You haven't offered anything more than ignorant opinions up to this point. I, on the other hand, have presented the FACTS and the documentation to support them.

Let’s see yours.

LOL, I saw your name at the bottom here for over an hour and knew you were furiously pounding away at those keys.

I don't think there's a single person who would equate evacuating Florida with what happened in New Orleans. Only someone desperate to make some vague point about Clinton's FEMA being better than Bush's FEMA.

I'm surprised you didn't bring up those starving children again. Thought that was your staple response?

I'll give you this one though...

Aren’t you arguing that Bush’s response to Katrina was better than Clinton’s response to… well, just about anything?

Bush's response to charges of tarnishing the office of president by dallying with interns in the oval office can't compare to Clinton's.

Oh wait, Bush hasn't been changed with tarnishing the office of president by dallying with interns in the oval office like Clinton, has he?

Nevermind, you win. Clinton was indeed the GOLDEN BOY. At least in your mind.

SMW

P.S. The topic of discussion here is NO MORE FREE LUNCHES. It'd be nice if you could stick to the subject.

LOL, I saw your name at the bottom here for over and hour and knew you were furiously pounding away at those keys.

I don't think there's a single person who would equate evacuating Florida with what happened in New Orleans. Only someone desperate to make some vague point about Clinton's FEMA being better than Bush's FEMA.

I'm surprised you didn't bring up those starving children again. Thought that was your staple response?

I'll give you this one though...

Aren’t you arguing that Bush’s response to Katrina was better than Clinton’s response to… well, just about anything?

Bush's response to charges of tarnishing the office of president by dallying with interns in the oval office can't compare to Clinton's.

Oh wait, Bush hasn't been changed with tarnishing the office of president by dallying with interns in the oval office like Clinton, has he?

Nevermind, you win. Clinton was indeed the GOLDEN BOY. At least in your mind.

SMW

P.S. The topic of discussion here is NO MORE FREE LUNCHES. It'd be nice if you could stick to the subject.


Heh. I knew it!

No facts. No data. Just the typical fallback Republican/conservative response when their argument has been utterly destroyed: "But... but.... Clinton got a hummer in the Oval Office!"

Typical. :thumbs:

The monies earned to build the estate have already been taxed. This is one of the most bullshit taxes there is. It's for NO ones benefit.
You don't understand the facts on this issue. I know someone who owns a ton of Disney stock. They originally owned radio station stock, which was later bought by Cap Cities, which was eventually bought by Disney. Their intial investment was gone up hundreds of times since the original radio station days. How much tax have paid on this, Ole Fart? NOTHING. NO TAX. Until they SELL THE STOCK, they pay no tax. If they were alowed to pass it onto their heirs without some sort of estate tax, their heirs would have paid NO TAX. There is no clearer example of FREE LUNCH on the planet. Stop and think before blindly accepting what Uncle Rush spoon-feeds you. The inheritance tax does not kick in on estates under $2M and that number goes up to $3.5M in 2009. That should be enough for about everyone on this board I would say. But not nearly enough for the wealthy elite (including radio talk show hosts). They want even more... free lunch.

OK, we shall consider it a taxable "gift".

The IRS already does.


Shouldn't ALL inheritance be taxed then?

No, just that over a certain amount, on those who can afford it.

:thumbs:

You don't understand the facts on this issue. I know someone who owns a ton of Disney stock. They originally owned radio station stock, which was later bought by Cap Cities, which was eventually bought by Disney. Their intial investment was gone up hundreds of times since the original radio station days. How much tax have paid on this, Ole Fart? NOTHING. NO TAX. Until they SELL THE STOCK, they pay no tax. If they were alowed to pass it onto their heirs without some sort of estate tax, their heirs would have paid NO TAX. There is no clearer example of FREE LUNCH on the planet. Stop and think before blindly accepting what Uncle Rush spoon-feeds you. The inheritance tax does not kick in on estates under $2M and that number goes up to $3.5M in 2009. That should be enough for about everyone on this board I would say. But not nearly enough for the wealthy elite (including radio talk show hosts). They want even more... free lunch.

Very well said!

:)

You don't understand the facts on this issue. I know someone who owns a ton of Disney stock. They originally owned radio station stock, which was later bought by Cap Cities, which was eventually bought by Disney. Their intial investment was gone up hundreds of times since the original radio station days. How much tax have paid on this, Ole Fart? NOTHING. NO TAX. Until they SELL THE STOCK, they pay no tax. If they were alowed to pass it onto their heirs without some sort of estate tax, their heirs would have paid NO TAX. There is no clearer example of FREE LUNCH on the planet. Stop and think before blindly accepting what Uncle Rush spoon-feeds you. The inheritance tax does not kick in on estates under $2M and that number goes up to $3.5M in 2009. That should be enough for about everyone on this board I would say. But not nearly enough for the wealthy elite (including radio talk show hosts). They want even more... free lunch.
...and back to $1M in 2011.

Who the hell is "Uncle Rush"?

What if it's a family business and/or farm property? I guess if the kids can't afford to pay or borrow the tax payments... then they can always sell it off to a huge corporation. You are one of those big corporation fans, I take it.

Remember... all successful people (and their families) do NOT deserve the money that they have. It's really meant for lazy people with no motivation to try to succeed. People like you perchance?

Those damn "wealthy elites" and their work and determination. May they all die a horrible death and burn in hell.:rolleyes:

Heh. I knew it!

No facts. No data. Just the typical fallback Republican/conservative response when their argument has been utterly destroyed: "But... but.... Clinton got a hummer in the Oval Office!"

Typical. :thumbs:

Facts about WHAT, Frannie? I don't even know what you're ranting about at this point. Obviously, you don't either.

Why don't you take my suggestion and start a new thread where you can talk about Clinton's FEMA vs Bush's FEMA and quote facts which will NEVER prove which natural disaster was the worst? Especially considering the FACT that New Orleans has never recovered while Floridians go on about their merry business as if they'd never even experienced a hurricane.

And regarding the hummer comment, you brought up Clinton... I didn't, and wouldn't... EVER. Trust me on that one.

http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t33/texrose752/twak.gif
SMW

If mine ever came back Hillary, I'd have to move.
;)
SMWToo early to move, but you can at least begin collecting boxes right now!:cool:

What if it's a family business and/or farm property? Hire a tax lawyer. That's what most people do. There are numerous legal ways to protect family assets.
Remember... all successful people (and their families) do NOT deserve the money that they have. Agreed - when it's a flippin free lunch that got them that money.It's really meant for lazy people with no motivation to try to succeed. People like you perchance?
Perchance non, mon cher. I work for a living.

Too early to move, but you can at least begin collecting boxes right now!:cool:

Aw, I'll probably stick around even if she DOES win (not likely). I managed to survive her husband's reign (don't make me say his name.... Frannie will FREAK!) I'm sure I'll survive hers.

:lolhit:

Heh. I knew it!

No facts. No data. Just the typical fallback Republican/conservative response when their argument has been utterly destroyed: "But... but.... Clinton got a hummer in the Oval Office!"

Typical. :thumbs:


Wait for the "Bush is moral, he is the new christ!, he only did a DUI - that's not so bad, bush is saving your ass"..

I managed to survive her husband's reign (don't make me say his name....You, like most Americans, probably did quite well under Bill Clinton. (No pun intended.):cool:

Wait for the "Bush is moral, he is the new christ!, he only did a DUI - that's not so bad, bush is saving your ass"..



http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t33/texrose752/savingyourass.gif


Didn't have to wait long, did ya!


:hahanot:

Wait for the "Bush is moral, he is the new christ!, he only did a DUI - that's not so bad, bush is saving your ass"..He had a couple of other incidents too, if I recall correctly.

You, like most Americans, probably did quite well under Bill Clinton. (No pun intended.):cool:


Yeah, I won't touch that one... in more ways than one.

:lolhit:

He had a couple of other incidents too, if I recall correctly.
The first arrest of George W. Bush was for theft at a hotel.
The second arrest was for disorderly conduct at a football game.
The third arrest, we've now learned, is for a very serious crime -- drunk driving.

(This was a C/P job.)

This is not a George Bush bashing tread. Either stick to the topic or go away. Maybe you can join Frannie on the Bush vs Clinton issue. Or start your own!

*walks off muttering... 'damn liberals. Have absolutely no incentive'*

This is not a George Bush bashing tread. Either stick to the topic or go away. Maybe you can join Frannie on the Bush vs Clinton issue. Or start your own!Not meant to bash, just to correct the record. But I accept the corrective refocus.

*walks off muttering... 'damn liberals. Have absolutely no incentive'*I'm pretty middle of the road on most things, dear. You know that.:cool:

Facts about WHAT, Frannie? I don't even know what you're ranting about at this point.

That figures. You can’t even follow your own thread. Let me clear it up for you; obviously this is too much for your wee brain to handle.

You started a thread stating your opinion that there should be "no free lunches" provided by the government. You have said (both in this thread and in others) that charity and non-profit/non-governmental agencies can and should cover whatever “free lunch” situation should arise and that, in your opinion, the government should remove itself from offering such services to the people.

The question is not SHOULD WE PROVIDE FOR PEOPLE WHO NEED HELP? The question is... whether or not it's the govt's responsibility.

Those are the FREE LUNCH issues I'd like to see this country avoid. Unnecessary and unwise investments, to be administered by yet another inefficient and ineffective govt agency. Which, once put into place, will NEVER go away... even if they don't work for everybody.

I said NO MORE GOVT PAID FREE LUNCHES.

I then remarked that it sure would be a bad thing if Dallas were hit by a major natural disaster. Why? Because if there were no FEMA – A GOVERNMENT AGENCY WHICH HANDS OUT FREE LUNCHES – you’d have to handle the situation your own damnself, something you apparently think people around the country should be able to do at all times throughout their lives (certainly not with the help of a government agency, at any rate).

You then countered with (Note: This is where YOU brought the Clintons into the discussion):

(LOL at a hurricane hitting Dallas... 300+ miles from the coast. Guess it COULD happen. Just like Mrs. Clinton COULD get elected and bring forth all those FREE LUNCHES FOR EVERYBODY promises.

I responded with documented data regarding natural disasters in the Dallas area. That argument destroyed, your tactic was to change the subject and start slamming FEMA:

FEMA. Now there's a good example of an efficient, well-managed govt agency, huh?

I replied:

First of all, I never claimed that today's FEMA is efficient or well-managed. I merely mentioned the fact that this particular agency hands out "free lunches" to people who've been hit by natural disasters.

FEMA actually worked quite well under Bill Clinton. It became a disaster itself when Bush started fucking with it.

Your response? To pretend there were no major natural disasters during Clinton’s time as president.

Of course, it helps that no major hurricanes struck, displacing hundreds of thousands of people while Clinton was president either. All govt agencies work well until they're put to the test.

Well, that was completely laughable. In hopes of educating you, I offered factual documentation about 16 major natural disasters that struck the US while Clinton was President and FEMA’s competent and timely response to them, and contrasted that with FEMA’s less-than-acceptable (and that’s putting it mildly!) disaster response record for the two natural disasters that occurred after Bush took office.

That argument also blown out of the water, you switched to this one:

To try and prove Clinton's administration (and FEMA) handled bigger natural disasters than Rita and Katrina is absurd.

I offered documented evidence of Hurricane Andrew which forced the evacuation of more than two million people, and noted that Clinton’s FEMA was there and ready before the hurricane even hit. UNLIKE BUSH’S FEMA during Katrina.

That argument destroyed, you then tried to insist that you knew more about surviving a natural disaster than I, based on your “personal experience… like having friends and family displaced by the hurricanes.” I told you about my own personal experience having a roof ripped off, smashed walls, and flooding as a result of the largest storm to ever hit Texas (Hurricane Carla).

That argument blown away, you resorted to calling me a liar:

In other words, small-minded people who custom-make their opinions to fit their own agenda. Even when FACTS prove otherwise.

Since I’d already provided plenty of documented evidence to back up my assertions, I asked you for yours. You have been unable to provide any such documentation.

Your response was to insist that I was:

desperate to make some vague point about Clinton's FEMA being better than Bush's FEMA.

Here’s your chance, SMW. Prove that Bush’s FEMA has done a better job than Clinton’s FEMA (I can’t believe you’re even trying to argue that point, but please, prove me wrong. I’m all ears.)

As a last resort, you brought up the same tired “defense” of your position that all conservatives/Republicans fall back on when their arguments are destroyed and they have nowhere else to go:

BUT CLINTON GOT A HUMMER IN THE OVAL OFFICE!

Finally:

you brought up Clinton... I didn't, and wouldn't... EVER. Trust me on that one.

Interestingly enough, the first mention of "Clinton" in the FEMA discussion came from you. Way back in post #68.

Anyway, do you get it now? The whole FEMA discussion is a part of your larger “NO MORE GOVT PAID FREE LUNCHES” complaint.

The kicker is that you’ve stated that you’d be the first one with your hand out for a free lunch, should the need arise.

Do you have any idea what a screaming hypocrite you are?

ROFL!

Frannie, why do you hate America? :eek:

It's our freedom. She hates us for our freedom!

:thumbs: Wow Frannie, you sure know how to research girl!

:thumbs: Wow Frannie, you sure know how to research girl!

Thanks! :) That's why they pay me the big bux! *






* For those who missed earlier mention elsewhere, my work entails hours of historical research prior to writing catalog descriptions and providing estimates (more research!) for a major US auction company. I am a research geek. :cool:

Too much spare time out in the sticks talking to da chooks I think.hehe.

Too much spare time out in the sticks talking to da chooks I think.hehe.

It suits me! Most days, I spend several hours researching/writing while fending off my whacked-out cat Spike (the goofball won't leave me alone!), then I putter around the yard with the chickens for company.

It's a hell of a life. :)

hehe,stay sane Fran,youll be snowed in shortly.

Interestingly enough, the first mention of "Clinton" in the FEMA discussion came from you. Way back in post #68.

Anyway, do you get it now? The whole FEMA discussion is a part of your larger “NO MORE GOVT PAID FREE LUNCHES” complaint.

The kicker is that you’ve stated that you’d be the first one with your hand out for a free lunch, should the need arise.

Do you have any idea what a screaming hypocrite you are?

I wish you good luck driving any sense into the head of the psychotic B*sh worshipper you are arguing with. And good luck in getting her to respond with any semblance of intellectual honesty.

Thanks! :) That's why they pay me the big bux! *






* For those who missed earlier mention elsewhere, my work entails hours of historical research prior to writing catalog descriptions and providing estimates (more research!) for a major US auction company. I am a research geek. :cool:

yeah...yeah...yeah... Whatdaya want a Holy Picture.
You seem to furgit the simplest of narrative.
The " F " in FEMA stands for " Federal ".Which most adults have
developed a pretty keen sense of understanding both the Role and
the competence.No need for ad hoc lectures on the significance
and beneficial nature of a program designed to help-out.
The rule of thumb should be First the city level,then the State
level as authors of goodwill and emergency services.
Don't dare blame New Orleans on the Bush Adm.
Haley Barber { Gov. of Mississippi } a Republican did a remarkable
job of dispatching needed clean-up and emergency care for those
hit during Katrina.
To this Day,Incompetent Re-elected Boob Mayor Nagin,has basically
been THE stumbling block for needed clean-up and revival in some
destroyed Wards.