FingerLakes1.com Forums
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
#1374353 - 11/23/12 12:21 PM Myth of the Fiscal Cliff
newsman38 Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 03/21/01
Posts: 4219
Loc: Fourth Estate
Cornell expert: The 'sky will not fall' if U.S. hits the ‘Fiscal Cliff’

The sky is not falling.

That's according to Steven Kyle, an expert in macroeconomics and government policy, and a professor of management at Cornell University's Dyson School of Applied Economics, who offered his comments on the potential economic implications of Congress and President Barack Obama failing to come to an agreement ahead of the Jan. 1, 2013 "Fiscal Cliff" deadline.

“The fiscal cliff isn't an emergency that requires most people to take immediate action," he said. "Actually, it is more of a slope than a cliff.

The "Fiscal Cliff" refers to the effect of laws that, if unchanged, could result in tax increases, spending cuts and a corresponding reduction in the budget deficit in 2013. The laws include tax increases due to the expiration of the "Bush tax cuts" and spending reductions under the Budget Control Act of 2011.

“If the government cuts spending levels as of Jan. 1 while allowing taxes on the bulk of the population to rise, it will constitute a negative shock whose effects will accumulate through the year to dampen growth," Kyle said. "Many commentators have spoken of ‘cuts of half a trillion dollars’ to defense spending and similar cuts to domestic budgets. What they often fail to emphasize is that these cuts would be spread over 10 years, making the effect in any one year far less, and that in the month of January 2013 even smaller.

“There is no explosion or crisis that will occur as was the case with the debt ceiling a couple of summers ago when failure to agree could have resulted in a default of the U.S. government on its debt obligations," he added. "Tax increases are more substantial in percentage terms than are spending cuts but are also spread out across the year. Most people have proportional amounts deducted from each paycheck and would not see the entire tax hike all at once."

That's not to say that resolving the issue before the Jan. 1, 2013 deadline wouldn't be the optimal choice.

“Would it be better to solve the problem before January? Sure. It is always better to do it ahead of time than play yet another game of chicken with our nation's economy," Kyle said. "But would the economy by substantially damaged if we didn’t get it done until the end of January? No."

Sat Nov 17, 2012.
From staff reports
Ithaca times


About that Fiscal Cliff

The "cliff" is a series of tax increases and budget cuts that automatically go into effect Jan. 1 unless Congress acts.

Will Congress act?

It will! I see the future: The politicians will meet and fret and hold press conferences and predict disaster. Then they'll reach a deal.

It will just postpone the reckoning, but they'll congratulate themselves, and the media will move on.

America, however, continues to go broke.

"They're not going to admit that we're bankrupt, and they won't admit that we're on the verge of a major, major change in our society," says Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas). "So they'll keep putting it aside, but then we'll eventually probably destroy the dollar."

The across-the-board cut, or "sequestration," was designed to be so distasteful that Congress would be moved to cut more deliberately. If it doesn't act, $110 billion in projected spending will be automatically cut—half from domestic spending, half from the Pentagon.

"They assume that they made it so bad that they wouldn't accept it, but I don't think they did," said Paul. "They're not even...talking about real cuts. They're talking about cuts in baseline budgeting."

Right, the old baseline budgeting trick.

"If they propose, let's say, a $10 billion increase for next year and cut it down to $9 billion, they say they're cutting 10 percent. But they're not cutting anything, they're only increasing it $9 billion instead of $10 billion. It's done on purpose so that people get confused."

Cuts of $110 billion would even be good for us because it would keep money in private hands, away from the bloated and freedom-killing bureaucracy.

Lately the media are focused on the $400 billion in tax increases that make up four-fifths of the fiscal cliff. We're told that if the Bush-era tax rate cuts expire and the spending reductions kick in, catastrophe will follow.

The other thing that scares Washington are the automatic cuts to Pentagon spending. "These draconian cuts represent a threat to our national security," say Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.

"The Pentagon is hysterical about it," notes Ben Friedman of the Cato Institute. "But it's about 10 percent, which would bring us roughly back to where we were in defense spending in 2006 ... adjusted for inflation, not exactly a crisis year in the Pentagon. They've gotten very spoiled at the Pentagon. They had years of luxury."

Automatic cuts might even be good, said Friedman.

"We need probably bigger cuts in the defense budget because we do too much. This will force us to make some choices. We try to be everything in the world ... pretending that every unstable country is a threat to us."

I won't lose sleep over automatic spending cuts. The "fiscal cliff" frightens me less than the bankruptcy cliff.

The "fiscal cliff" is less frightening than the bankruptcy cliff.
John Stossel | November 21, 2012

Top
FingerLakes1.com
#1375956 - 12/05/12 12:21 AM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: newsman38]
VM Smith Offline
Diamond Member

Registered: 11/29/05
Posts: 38160
Loc: Ship of Fools
_________________________
If you vote for government, you have no right to complain about what government does.

Top
#1375959 - 12/05/12 12:40 AM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: newsman38]
Timbo Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 07/18/12
Posts: 9571
Loc: CNY
I would HOPE the military takes some cuts.

The US spends MORE money on defense than the next 17 largest militaries COMBINED. I suspect there's a little wiggle room there.

The republicans are trying to up defense spending BEYOND what the Military says it needs.

Total insanity.
_________________________
Everyone's entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.

Top
#1376253 - 12/06/12 11:05 PM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: Timbo]
VM Smith Offline
Diamond Member

Registered: 11/29/05
Posts: 38160
Loc: Ship of Fools
If you let them define, and thus control, the language, then they also control your thinking, and then they've wrong-footed you to the point where you've already lost any possible debate with them about reducing spending. It's not defense spending (unless you count defending places like Garcia Diego, Tokyo, and Berlin the same as defending Chicago); it's offense spending. It's not a Defense Dept.; it's a War Dept..


Edited by VM Smith (12/06/12 11:12 PM)
_________________________
If you vote for government, you have no right to complain about what government does.

Top
#1376269 - 12/07/12 08:27 AM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: VM Smith]
twocats Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 02/09/10
Posts: 11880
Loc: NYS
Brilliant!


WASHINGTON -- A move to embarrass Democrats backfired on Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell Thursday as the Kentucky Republican proposed a vote on raising the nation's debt ceiling -- then filibustered it when the Democrats tried to take him up on the offer.

On Thursday morning McConnell had made a motion for the vote on legislation that would let the president extend the country's borrowing limit on his own. Congress would then have the option to disapprove such hikes, in a fashion similar to one that McConnell first suggested during last year's standoff over the debt ceiling.

The minority leader apparently did not think Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) would take him up on his offer, which would have allowed McConnell to portray President Barack Obama's desire for such authority as something even Democrats opposed.

Reid objected at first, but told McConnell he thought it might be a good idea. After Senate staff reviewed the proposal, Reid came back to the floor and proposed a straight up-or-down vote on the idea.

McConnell was forced to say no.

"What we're talking about here is a perpetual debt ceiling grant, in effect, to the president, " McConnell said. "Matters of this level of controversy always require 60 votes."

Sixty votes are required to end a filibuster during debate on a bill and hold a vote.

Democrats immediately seized on McConnell's reversal, noting it was the sort of obstruction that they think warrants changes to the rules on filibusters.

"What we have here is a case of the Republicans here in the Senate once again not taking yes for an answer," Reid said. "This morning the Republican leader asked consent to have a vote on his proposal. Just now I told everyone we're willing to have that vote, an up-or-down vote, and now the Republican leader objects to his own idea, so I guess we have a filibuser of his own bill."

Democrats piled on.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) told reporters that McConnell thought he'd thrown Democrats for a loop. "It was a little too clever by half," Schumer said, adding that it "would have been a great moment."

"Sen. McConnell's usually astute political radar was a bit off today," Schumer said.

"This may be a moment in Senate history when a senator made a proposal and, when given an opportunity for a vote on that proposal, filibustered his own proposal," said Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). "I think we have reached a new spot in the history of the Senate we've never seen before."

"I don't know how the Republicans can say they're not abusing the filibuster after what we saw on the floor today," Durbin told reporters. "It's somewhat comic, but sad as well, that we've reached the point where Sen. McConnell will not even accept a majority vote on his own measure."

Democrats did, however, take up a previous offer by McConnell on a vote that he seemed to think would fail, which he then declined to filibuster. In July the Senate voted to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for 98 percent of earners, but not for the richest 2 percent.

The passage of the bill has put significant pressure on Republicans in the House, who are opposed to letting any of the tax cuts expire.

Michael McAuliff covers Congress and politics for The Huffington Post. Talk to him on Facebook.
_________________________
Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty.

Top
#1376295 - 12/07/12 12:37 PM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: Timbo]
Offline

Senior Member

Registered: 01/16/12
Posts: 7644
Originally Posted By: Timbo
I would HOPE the military takes some cuts.

The US spends MORE money on defense than the next 17 largest militaries COMBINED. I suspect there's a little wiggle room there.

The republicans are trying to up defense spending BEYOND what the Military says it needs.

Total insanity.


Quote:
I would HOPE the military takes some cuts.


I hope some of the $1.4 billion the taxpayers spend on the Obama family perks, get cut.

Top
#1376301 - 12/07/12 01:07 PM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: ]
Timbo Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 07/18/12
Posts: 9571
Loc: CNY
Originally Posted By: Chicago Jesus
Originally Posted By: Timbo
I would HOPE the military takes some cuts.

The US spends MORE money on defense than the next 17 largest militaries COMBINED. I suspect there's a little wiggle room there.

The republicans are trying to up defense spending BEYOND what the Military says it needs.

Total insanity.


Quote:
I would HOPE the military takes some cuts.


I hope some of the $1.4 billion the taxpayers spend on the Obama family perks, get cut.

If you can account for those figures, I'll second your opinion (in other words, PROVE IT).

FYI: US Defense budget for 2010 - $689,000,000,000 and it's gone up considerably since then.


_________________________
Everyone's entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.

Top
#1376342 - 12/07/12 05:04 PM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: Timbo]
kyle585 Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 02/18/09
Posts: 11228
Loc: Somewhere out there
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/democ...--politics.html

Amid the standoff in Washington, D.C., over a deal to avoid the "fiscal cliff," Democrats received a boost when the November jobs report showed a drop in unemployment.

Nonfarm payroll employment rose by 146,000 in November, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics report released on Friday, and unemployment dropped from 7.9 percent in October to 7.7 percent in November.

The chairman of the president's Council of Economic Advisers, Alan Krueger, noted in a statement that the unemployment rate was at its "lowest since December 2008."

"It is critical that we continue the policies that are building an economy that works for the middle class," Krueger said.

Top
#1376347 - 12/07/12 05:24 PM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: kyle585]
cwjga Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/06/08
Posts: 6153
Loc: NY
Right Change: Obama’s Fiscal Cliff Plan is Truly “Nothing But a Power Play”
Fri, December 07, 2012

Congress and President Obama have made, “no progress” on the fiscal cliff negotiations. We wonder why? There’s a logical explanation to that and it starts with the word compromise. In order to dodge one of the biggest tax increases in our history, Washington has to come up with compromise. Democrats control the Senate and Executive Branch and Republicans control the House. President Obama and the Democrats proposed a plan: $1.6 trillion in tax hikes with no spending cut guarantees. House Republicans proposed their plan worth $2.2 trillion: $800 billion in tax revenue, $600 billion in health savings, and $600 billion in other cuts split evenly between mandatory and non-mandatory spending. That was as of Monday, December 3rd, 2012. A lot has happened since then to explain the lack of progress.

Obama’s Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner (who’s no stranger to tax trouble) told Republicans there would be no deal at all without tax hikes. Boehner and McConnell were in disbelief with what they were hearing. In 2011, Obama said:

“What we said was give us $1.2 trillion in additional revenues, which could be accomplished without hiking tax rates. It could simply be accomplished by eliminating loopholes, eliminating some deductions and engaging in a tax reform process that could lower rates generally while broadening the base.”

Despite that fact, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell all but begged the Democratic leader of the Senate to take Obama’s plan up for a vote. Reid refused and objected the vote. This explains Obama’s entire strategy. If Obama’s sole strategy was to get the Democratic Senate to pass his plan, why, someone please explain why Reid would refuse to bring it up to a vote. The answer is simple and Charles Krauthammer could not have put it better:

“Such nonsense abounds because Obama’s objective in these negotiations is not economic but political: not to solve the debt crisis but to fracture the Republican majority in the House. Get Boehner to cave, pass the tax hike with Democratic votes provided by Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and let the Republican civil war begin.

It doesn’t even matter whether Boehner gets deposed as speaker. Either way, the Republican House would be neutered, giving Obama a free hand to dominate Washington and fashion the entitlement state of his liking.

This is partisan zero-sum politics. Nothing more. Obama has never shown interest in genuine debt reduction. He does nothing for two years, then spends the next two ignoring his own debt-reduction commission. In less than four years, he has increased U.S. public debt by a staggering 83 percent. As a percentage of gross domestic product, the real marker of national solvency, it has spiked from 45 percent to 70 percent.

Obama has never once publicly suggested a structural cut in entitlements. On the contrary, he created an entirely new entitlement — Obamacare — that, according to the Congressional Budget Office, will increase spending by $1.7 trillion over 11 years.

What’s he thinking? Doesn’t Obama see looming ahead the real economic cliff — a European-like collapse under the burden of unsustainable debt? Perhaps, but he wants to complete his avowedly transformational social-democratic agenda first and let his successors — likely Republican — act as tax collectors on the middle class (where the real money is) and takers of subsidies from the mouths of babes.

Or possibly Obama will get fiscal religion and undertake tax and entitlement reform in his second term — but only after having destroyed the Republican opposition so that he can carry out the reformation on his own ideological terms.

What should Republicans do? Stop giving stuff away. If Obama remains intransigent, let him be the one to take us over the cliff. And then let the new House, which is sworn in weeks before the president, immediately introduce and pass a full across-the-board restoration of the George W. Bush tax cuts.

Obama will counter with the usual all-but-the-rich tax cut — as the markets gyrate and the economy begins to wobble under his feet.

Result? We’re back to square one, but with a more level playing field. The risk to Obama will be rising and the debt ceiling will be looming. Most important of all, however, Republicans will still be in possession of their unity, their self-respect — and their trousers.”

Republicans ought to heed this warning: stand firm and let President Obama own the fiscal cliff. Do not allow him to divide the Grand Old Party so that he may implement his ultimate Liberal agenda. The future of our party depends on it.
_________________________
By an almost 10-point margin, voters would now vote for Mitt Romney rather than Barack Obama. CNN

Top
#1376415 - 12/08/12 09:29 AM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: kyle585]
cwjga Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/06/08
Posts: 6153
Loc: NY
The People get it. Obama and the Democrats are clueless.
_________________________
By an almost 10-point margin, voters would now vote for Mitt Romney rather than Barack Obama. CNN

Top
#1376465 - 12/08/12 01:12 PM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: cwjga]
kyle585 Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 02/18/09
Posts: 11228
Loc: Somewhere out there
Originally Posted By: cwjga
The People get it. Obama and the Democrats are clueless.
They do? Then how come the people just voted Obama and the Democrats back into power by comfortable margins?

Top
#1376481 - 12/08/12 04:14 PM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: kyle585]
cwjga Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/06/08
Posts: 6153
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: kyle585
Originally Posted By: cwjga
The People get it. Obama and the Democrats are clueless.
They do? Then how come the people just voted Obama and the Democrats back into power by comfortable margins?


So your saying they don't get it?

Your right had they been more informed and not lied to so much they would not have voted for Obama.

Wow, we agree.
_________________________
By an almost 10-point margin, voters would now vote for Mitt Romney rather than Barack Obama. CNN

Top
#1376488 - 12/08/12 04:55 PM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: twocats]
cwjga Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 11/06/08
Posts: 6153
Loc: NY

Reid ‘objects’ to vote on President’s fiscal cliff proposal …what?
Kevin Danielsen December 7, 2012 8:29 am


Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell decided to call the Obama administration’s bluff, and put the White House proposal to a vote in the Senate through attaching it as an amendment to the Russia trade bill. Interestingly enough, what happened next may have spoken volumes about the intentions of the White House and hill Democrats: Senator Harry Reid moved to block the bill. The leader of Democrat Senators, Harry Reid, just blocked Barack Obama’s proposal. But, why? The Senator says,


“I reserve the right to object. I just a minute ago moved to the Russia trade bill,” said Reid. “The purpose of moving to this bill is to protect American jobs. If we don’t do this legislation, we’ll lose American jobs for sure and put American companies in even worse shape than they are with Chinese and European companies. So the question is really this: are we going to get serious here and legislate or is this more of the obstruction we felt so much during this last Congress?

Senator Reid just objected to a vote on the President’s proposal, because this was an act of ‘obstruction’ on the part of Republicans. Perhaps. But, isn’t this what Democrats already want? Don’t they favor the President’ bill? Even if this was an attempt to cause mayhem and call the President’s bluff, why wouldn’t Reid want to make McConnell look even more foolish and easily pass the fiscal cliff proposal with a Democrat majority?



They may not have as much support as we’re made to think. The Hill reports:


Senate Democratic centrists, whom Grover Norquist describes as the “hostages” in the tax debate, are lying low and keeping quiet about competing proposals from President Obama and House GOP leaders.

The truth is, this was a very odd altercation between the two Senators. I’m beginning to think that even Senate Democrats weren’t too fond of the President’s plan from the moment it danced off Tim Geithner’s lips…
_________________________
By an almost 10-point margin, voters would now vote for Mitt Romney rather than Barack Obama. CNN

Top
#1376495 - 12/08/12 06:08 PM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: cwjga]
sands Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 09/05/05
Posts: 7429
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: cwjga
Your right had they been more informed and not lied to so much they would not have voted for Obama.



Exactly.

YouTube video where Obama voters are told Obama policies are Romney's policies and asked their feelings on them....


Obama Supporters Actually Hate Obama's Policies

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Skw-0jv9kts

Top
#1376589 - 12/09/12 09:08 AM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: sands]
kyle585 Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 02/18/09
Posts: 11228
Loc: Somewhere out there
Finally Fox News is printing something I can agree with:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/12/08/what-led-to-fiscal-crisis-years-kicking-can/

The possibility of Washington failing to avert the double-whammy of tax hikes and spending cuts next month is looking far less remote.

With 24 days remaining to strike a deal, the two sides remain far apart. House Speaker John Boehner claimed Friday that President Obama’s offers are just “more of the same.” Democrats say Republicans have to give more on taxes before they can reach a serious agreement.

Given this divide, it may seem counterintuitive that lawmakers left themselves just two months to negotiate their way out of the crisis – the two months after Election Day and before the Jan 1 deadline.

But the reality is that lawmakers have been trying to strike this kind of a deal for years, and each time ended up pushing off the very toughest decisions to a future date. The current stand-off is the result of these incremental maneuvers and delayed decisions.

......................................................


2013, and beyond: If there is a deal, it’s possible lawmakers will again punt the toughest decisions to 2013 and beyond. Indeed the White House proposal, which Republicans have rejected, calls for discussions about tax reform and entitlement cuts to take place as part of a “Stage 2.”


Top
#1376616 - 12/09/12 01:20 PM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: kyle585]
twocats Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 02/09/10
Posts: 11880
Loc: NYS
Everybody's a comedian today.



‘Twas the month before fiscal doomsday, and all through the House
Boehner and the Republicans were running their mouths
About tax breaks for the wealthy, but austerity for the rest
In hopes their rich overlords would keep filling their chests

The children don’t matter when profits are at stake
Who cares how very little their parents all make?
“The middle class are all takers!” Says the out of touch Right-wing
Never mind that Red States get the most Federal bling

Over the cliff, they seemed bound and determined to take us
“Even an electoral college trouncing will never, ever shake us!
We’ll end your mortgage deduction, and make you pay more
While our rich campaign donors move all their cash offshore!”

Out on the White House lawn, Obama did stride
A pen in his hand, and nothing to hide
He said he’d sign the deal that only raised rates on two percent
But Republicans told that Kenyan-Socialist-Commie to just get bent

Now Boehner, now Norquist, now Paul Ryan and Rand Paul
Are insisting on reverse income redistribution rather than call
Their buddies on Wall Street and ask for a little more
Four extra cents on a dollar might really hurt them, after all

Though the election was run on the proposition of higher rates
The Republicans ignore the results, and harp on Benghazi-gate
The country has moved on, and accepted that things in the Middle East aren’t nice
But why fix the economy when you can trash and bash Ms. Rice?

Math and facts are biased and scientists hate God
What this country needed was a VP with a hot bod
But the parasites all spoke, and they elected their Socialist King
So it’s back to obstruction and not fixing a damn thing

So they’ll hem and they’ll haw, and propose the same stuff
Gut and cut the social safety net and tell the rich they do enough
Screw the old and sick, they’re just dragging us down
Who needs a life preserver when the middle class can just drown?

- James Schlarmann, The Political Garbage Chute


Edited by twocats (12/09/12 01:21 PM)
_________________________
Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty.

Top
#1376630 - 12/09/12 03:15 PM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: sands]
kyle585 Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 02/18/09
Posts: 11228
Loc: Somewhere out there
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/12/09/republicans-tax-hike-rich/1756807/

December 9. 2012 - WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republicans would probably agree to higher tax rates on the wealthiest Americans if it meant getting a chance to overhaul costly government entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security, a GOP senator predicted Sunday.

The comments by Bob Corker of Tennessee — a fiscal conservative who has been gaining stature in the Senate as a pragmatic deal broker — puts new pressure on House Speaker John Boehner and other Republican leaders to rethink their long-held assertion that even the very rich shouldn't see their rates go up next year. GOP leaders have argued that the revenue gained by hiking the top two tax rates would be trivial to the deficit, and that any tax hike hurts job creation.

But Corker says insisting on that red line — especially since President Obama won re-election after campaigning on raising tax rates on the wealthy — might not be wise.

"There is a growing group of folks looking at this and realizing that we don't have a lot of cards as it relates to the tax issue before year end," Corker told Fox News Sunday.

Top
#1376638 - 12/09/12 03:44 PM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: kyle585]
Offline

Senior Member

Registered: 01/16/12
Posts: 7644
kyle, do you really think people believe the crap you post?

I say NO! Even if you sight the source.

Top
#1376645 - 12/09/12 04:55 PM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: ]
kyle585 Offline
Silver Member

Registered: 02/18/09
Posts: 11228
Loc: Somewhere out there
Originally Posted By: Chicago Jesus
kyle, do you really think people believe the crap you post?

I say NO! Even if you sight the source.
So you believe that "USAToday" is lying about what Senator Bob Corker said? amazing.

Top
#1376647 - 12/09/12 05:16 PM Re: Myth of the Fiscal Cliff [Re: kyle585]
Offline

Senior Member

Registered: 01/16/12
Posts: 7644
Originally Posted By: kyle585
Originally Posted By: Chicago Jesus
kyle, do you really think people believe the crap you post?

I say NO! Even if you sight the source.
So you believe that "USAToday" is lying about what Senator Bob Corker said? amazing.


I don't believe a word you post! I believe anything you post, has been tainted or infected by you in someway!

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >