Wow, the good people(Sorry to the few who aren't this way) of Field and Stream once again reply with nothing but statements that have no support by any reasoning. Sarge posts a challenge that he expects no one to do, then I do it. Everyone else changes topic and thumbs down. Bubba says I didn't answer the questions, rather I offered statements for each one. So you mean I offered statements in response to questions? Statements that addressed the question? And you said it wasn't an answer? I wonder why? Oh yeah, because I have different views on the subject matter that I support with reasoning. So of course, rather than producing a counterargument, you call the lynch-mob, armed with the thumbs down button. Haverod responds with some unrelated rant on taxes. Bubba then appears seemingly confused about what an answer is, the definition of which is as follows: "A thing said, written, or done to deal with or as a reaction to a question, statement, or situation". But never mind, you're probably right. It must not be an answer unless it conforms to YOUR views. Sorry I was previously unaware. And then Clay comes along with some chain e-mail that some uneducated conservative started. I mean, honestly that entire thing just played off of nonsense stereotypes. And then you make absolutely retarded jokes about someone. Anyway, I digress, and will be posting a challenge for you guys. Thanks in advance for all the thumbs down's this post will receive.

Dangle,
Spread the word to those that do not visit message boards such as this one. There are way too many people who are too 'busy' to pay attention to their government. Convert the Independents and conservative liberals. It is going to take a herculean effort to take back the Country. It is the younger generation who must take up the fight because they are the ones who are going to be affected most. I am nearing the last chapter, although i hope it is a long one. We did what we could to fight the Commies, but now they are amongst us more than ever.
If you really want to be shocked, read my post in the Answer section about the proposed 'background check' legislation. This proposal is still ACTIVE and needs to be exposed for what it is.
How many people really know how far reaching this proposal is?
I did not know.
The fight is ON, and 2014 is not that far off. All hinges on the outcome of that election - lose the House and lose America.
Jim

I like 7,8,9 and 20. Get ready for a Hoski wind blown filibuster.
He will have to search the cosmos for a rebuttal.

1. Very few liberals were saying it was a right extremist, and even fewer said it meant anything about that party. I watch liberal news stations and didn't notice hardly any politicization. Why would the Muslim part matter? It is already well known that many Muslim extremists would do such a thing.

2. Taxes that pay for those first things are optional. The other option is to leave America so you don't have pay the taxes. No one is forced to pay taxes, as they have the option to leave the country. You pay taxes to have the right to live here. Two clear options there. So, no, we don't believe you have the right to force people at gunpoint to pay for those things.

3. When did any liberal ever say that characteristics or morals didn't matter. Those two items make up a person, so it would hard for them not to matter. Anywhere you saw this must have been WAY out of context. Even if you did hear this, is very few who believe so. Just like very few republicans are ra cists.

4. I don't think that only liberals can't answer that question. There is no exact way to answer that, and I have never seen a conservative answer it. Both parties agree that there is a "fair share", they just don't agree what it is. So basically, you can't answer that question except for with an opinion, which will differ among everyone.

5. Well, if you look at history, cutting taxes have provided temporary relief, but is followed by a recession. (Examples: Reagan and Bush)

6. Pro-choice. Abortion is extremely different from your other examples. It is obviously a deeply personal matter, and much more significant to involved parties than in your examples. Also, abortion involves another person's body and morals.

7. Corporations aren't awful. They're wonderful and create plenty of jobs and stimulate the economy. They just don't deserve or need the ridiculous amount of subsidies and tax breaks they receive. There are other ways to make America more hospitable for corporations, and to persuade them to stay here.

8. If you look a history of recessions you will see that many of them were followed by increased government spending, which helped with them. The lack of recession is generally good for reducing deficit. You will also see that several recessions resulted after low government spending.

9. Those studies don't take into account time spent volunteering or items donated. Liberals give more in those categories. Also, those studies don't take into account the percentage of income, and liberals are on average less wealthy than republicans. By percentage of income, the numbers are extremely close. Also, liberals are less likely to attend church. According to a study by Google, if you take out church donations, then liberals donate more to charity. Not saying that church is any less charitable of a thing to donate to though. Many who attend church wouldn't donated if they didn't feel obligated to, however, and they just do it as a social normal. I'm not implying that you are that way, so no offense to you.

10. Well, given that the recession has bottomed out, and the economy is starting to stabilize, I don't think the lack of dramatic change would lead us to the point of Greece and Cyprus. We are going to be the world's top oil producer by 2015, and have much more resources than Greece.

11. Well, freezing the entire budget would never happen, freezing budgets have already been implemented on many programs. The republican support of budget freezes is quite hypocritical. They say that tax cuts will increase individual spending, and stimulate the economy, but fail to realize how many wages budget freezes will affect, and in turn how individual spending will be affected. Budget freezes will also cause negative effects on healthcare and medical and scientific research. Effects that could be avoided if taxes were increased on the wealthy, and budget freezes could then be unnecessary.

12. Marriage is a personal concept, and what partners feel is marriage cannot be changed by laws, and if they feel that marriage is real by their personal ceremonies, then it is to them, and that is all that matters regardless of the legal standing. So gay couples and polygamists, and whoever it is, feel that they are married based on their interpretation of the Bible, which can be interpreted however you personally interpret it. The reason that many feel gay marriage should be legal is that gay couples are denied tremendous amounts of tax benefits and healthcare for their partners because they are not legally "married". Polygamists are slightly less affected by such, and lack the publicity of gay marriage, however it could be next after gay marriage is legalized. Not sure if you mean intra-family relationships by "adult siblings"(I'm not familiar with that term), but it is illegal because of the extreme effects such relationships have after several generations, and its negative effects on the gene pool.

13. Yes, given the large amount of money the top 25% control. The top 25% control 66% of all income.

14. First of all, in many liberal countries the losing side is required to pay for the others' legal fees. Since when are liberals against this? Secondly, many states have exceptions to the current "American Rule" (Each side pays for their own legal fees). Thirdly, judges can require that losing sides pay the other side's legal fees, if they see it fit.

15. Well, I'm not actually against capital punishment, but some are opposed morally to answering death with more death. Many are wrongly convicted, and killed. Also, despite popular belief, life sentences are often less expensive than current capital punishment processes. As far abortion goes, I will start from a scientific point of view. For the first 20 weeks, the embryo is in the same state as eggs in females, which would mean that women kill every month by the conservative definition because they intentionally aren't having babies those months. Now to the moral/religious issue: If study ancient religious scriptures you will find that they state that unborn children have no souls. It was the Catholic Church that later amended these scriptures. It boils down to be a very personal decision, and I don't believe that anyone has the right to decide what one does in such a personal choice that lacks any definite evidence.

16. Another hypocrisy of the conservatives. Increasing the spending of individuals, just not through their tactics, one of which leads to job loss for many(budget freezing). It obviously doesn't have a large negative effect, given that states with higher minimum wages have noticeably lower then low minimum wage states. Example: Georgia and Arkansas - min. wage < $6.25 Poverty rate > 18.4% --- Massachusetts and Connecticut - min. wage > $8 Poverty rate < 10.6% ---

17. Global warming is another very controversial topic. I personally believe it is a cycle, so I am not well versed in the other viewpoint. However, humans contribution what with cars and other industrious developments are definitely not good for the environment, so I have no problem with green research and developments, and the jobs created by such industries.

18. This can only be answered by opinion, with no definitive answer as to how much power states should have versus the federal government, just as #4 is. There must be power with each, and it is hard to determine which way it needs to go. It would be hard for either a liberal or a conservative to answer this question with substantial evidence or reasoning, without be strongly biased or opinionated.

19. So you are saying that we should increase government services to a level that people are willing to pay for? No one would be willing to pay more for less, as is implied with the way you worded your question. Anyway, if the middle class tax stays the same or is cut, it does not warrant increased government spending in those areas either way. If you could clarify a bit about your question, perhaps I could elaborate more.

20. Firstly, they would be sued an incredible amount. Not only for gender discrimination, but also because it would be obvious what they were doing, since they're pay wouldn't be anywhere near competition in whatever their industry may be. Secondly, this significantly lower average pay would drive employees away to competition, and they would be left with the bottom tier employees. Also, if you are attempting to argue that women aren't payed less than men, you will be hard pressed to find any credible studies supporting argument, as it is well documented and studied that women are payed less than men by non-government employers(Which stricter pay discrimination regulations)

CoyoteHunter,
Interesting perspective....

@haverodwilltravel - If you have a problem with Obama's tax rate, perhaps you will have even more of a problem with Romney's 14% tax rate.

Well, actually Obama didn't brag about his tax rate. And his approval is up, so I hardly say "The whole world is beginning to wake up to his 'shuck & jive'"

I'll agree that you offered statements for each question, saying you "answered" them is a little off kilter.
Answering a true question with "false" is also an answer, it just doesn't count!

Spelling? That's why I like using Mozilla Firefox

MIA?
Hardly.
Fact is, Sarge (and others) have thrown these little quips out here before. I've gone to the trouble of factually responding a few times...this time CoyoteHunter has done a very nice job refuting.

Ice9,
Garbage. D minus.

Ludwig von Mises captures for us the insidious nature of the bureaucratic State:
“The champions of socialism (Communists) call themselves progressives, but they recommend a system which is characterized by rigid observance of routine and by a resistance to every kind of improvement. They call themselves liberals, but they are intent upon abolishing liberty. They call themselves democrats, but they yearn for dictatorship. They call themselves revolutionaries, but they want to make the government omnipotent. They promise the blessings of the Garden of Eden, but they plan to transform the world into a gigantic post office. Every man but one a subordinate clerk in a bureau. What an alluring utopia! What a noble cause to fight!”

Just start reading Godfatherpolitics.com and send a few checks to Worldview Publications LLC. Then you'll get the true sheeple view of the world instead of having to struggle through it here. Anyone have an original thought on this?

So yet again the sheeple speak...if the rich can cheat on their taxes, if big business can get a tax cut to ship jobs overseas then eventually the the trickle down will cometh. And yet, you are poorer than your parents generation. Working and middle class incomes have fallen for more than 30 years. The rich are richer than ever because they cheat on their taxes. And you're happy with your cheap crap from Walmart and your big screen tv.

The liberals encourage co-dependency- oh government save me, support me. I need my SSI, Medicare, Medicade, Welfare, Food Stamps, 3 years of unemployment, ect. ad nauseum.

And, lets police the world. Spill blood and treasure for what...freedom loving democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Maybe we should look at what democracy is and ask, how much say do you really have in your destiny?

Methinks FB cries "Oh government save me, give me my bread and circuses". Liberalism in the closet is still liberalism.

I want a system of fair accountability for all...not the bribery and corruption we have now. I want wealth earned fairly not by cheating others. Work hard and earn well, period.

"redistribute" wealth!

allegnmtn

Lots of folks say it won't work, but I'd like to see a 10% flat tax.
Earn a dollar? Send in a dime!
Earn a million? Send in $10k!

SocSec? I'd like to see it done totally away with. I have my ideas, but we all know THAT will never happen!
Next? Kill Obamacare stone cold, grave yard dead!
Open up health insurance sales across state lines and revamp malpractice lawsuits.
Next? Kick "union" out of "public" sector jobs.
Next? Actually HAVE a budget and stick to it!
Kill "Green Energy" subsidies (waste?).

allegnmtn

Lots of folks say it won't work, but I'd like to see a 10% flat tax.
Earn a dollar? Send in a dime!
Earn a million? Send in $10k!

SocSec? I'd like to see it done totally away with. I have my ideas, but we all know THAT will never happen!
Next? Kill Obamacare stone cold, grave yard dead!
Open up health insurance sales across state lines and revamp malpractice lawsuits.
Next? Kick "union" out of "public" sector jobs.
Next? Actually HAVE a budget and stick to it!
Kill "Green Energy" subsidies (waste?).

allegnmtn

I'm sorry amigo, but your "scum bag" this and "scum bag" that reveal that you can't have a cognizant thought train and prefer to allow your "emotion" to dominate.
Don't think the wealthy got that way and stay that way by pi$$ing their money off! They're where they are because they know what "wasteful" spending (Gov't) is and
how to use money to create money.
Once more, the wealthy aren't the problem! The problem is inane taxes.

Ok take 2011. First off, and what you appear to be totally ignorant of, and most liberals are, is the fact that Big Oil spends an incredible amount of money in locating new oil, moving rigs etc. Their overhead is incredible, and has to be if America wants inexpensive energy. Those overheads reduce the taxable income, but take 13%. 13% of how much is how much? Just look at how Obama has denied drilling off shore, in Anwar, and on Fed lands where the tax revenue would be tremendous, and the jobs and personal incomes would be very high greatly benefiting an economy in decline. Instead he choses to beatup on Big Oil favoring Green Energy that has been as corrupt as it gets, and a total failure.

So other than making excuses for big oil as to why they should be subsidized...are you a socialist per chance?,..could you answer the question about the corporate tax rate, the average American's tax rate, and while you're at it, explain where our constitution says we should be living in this Socialist welfare (corporate and personal) "paradise"? Enough shuck and jive...we get too much from the politicians already.

Liberals, Conservatives, Republicans, Democrats, Obama, Romney...where do they and apparently you, get the idea that taxes should be a game of loopholes, subsidies,, and high powered lawyers? We've gone down a wrong path somewhere.

It doesn't. A 17% flat tax rate doesn't hammer anyone...let's ask Dangle why the rich would would fight it...their Federal tax rate is way higher than 17% , right? Why would the richest Americans and corporate America fight a flat tax system? Dangle?

So Dangle, the shuck and jive is your answer? What's the corporate tax rate? What's the average rate paid by the average working/middle class American? Avoiding the issue doesn't make it go away.

Here's another example of the distortions you want to forward. You, and the libs want to forward the dollar amount of profits that Big Oil makes, the lot of zeroes numbers knowing the uninformed will believe it to be a gross amount, and an example of the greedy capitalist. Forget the size of the company. They make less on the invested dollar than most companies do. But when it comes to my question as to how many billions of dollars every QT does Big Oil pay into the FEDS. you now don't want to post the dollar amount, just the fact "they paid only 13%" as if that would impress the uninformed that it wan't fair, or enough. All you libs should be made to take basic ECON 101, and get a factual impression of what has made our system the greatest system in the world.

OB and Hillary are reading right out of Saul Aulinski "Rules For Radicals" 1972. He is a Communist/Marxist organizer. His Rules are summarized as:
Always remember the first rule of power tactics: Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.

The second rule is: Never go outside the experience of your people.

…The third rule is: Wherever possible go outside the experience of the enemy. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.

…the fourth rule is: Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.

…the fourth rule carries within it the fifth rule: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.

…the sixth rule is: A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.

…the seventh rule is: A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.

…the eighth rule: Keep the pressure on.

…the ninth rule: The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.

The tenth rule: The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.

…The eleventh rule is: If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside.

…The twelfth rule: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.

…The thirteenth rule: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. — Rules for Radicals

Dangle, just want you to know we all know you young people struggle with a lot of issues and confusion. But don't worry. Even if you hate women Obuma and pals have your back. You can still get married and adopt kids.

I watch a lot of competitive college, and pro-sports. I watch virtually all of the pro-golf tourneys. Now a lot of the pro-golfers are multi-millionaires, and pay hefty fed taxes, as Phil Mikelson identified. But how about the sponsors like AT&T last weekend for example at the Bryron Nelson Tourney in Dallas, TEX.? They not only sponsor succcess, but contribute $100,'s of millions of charitable dollars that they raise for those in need in the Dallas, area. But that is a common theme in the USA. People taking risk, becoming successful, and greatly contributing their time, and money to improve their community/communities. Those that attack success want to kill the goose, and that is what liberals are doing.

??? Apple paid a 9.8% effective Federal tax rate in 2011. They got called before Congress to explain why they avoided $3.6 billion in Federal taxes by hiding profits in Ireland. They've been caught and are scrambling to cover up. Again, with the loopholes and manipulation.

google Apple revenue and taxes. See for yourself.

On revenue made in the USA, they paid $6 billion dollars(30.5%) taxes on revenue of $20 billion.
If the politicians do things that drive Corporations off shore, they should not expect to be paid taxes on revenue generated off shore.

This is politics. The Republicans in the Senate are going after Apple not Exxon Mobile because of the company's political leanings. Research where their CEO and most of the employees contribute their millions.

If you're a conservative, you should get on the Apple smashing band wagon. If you want a tax system that makes sense, you should look beyond the politics

...and as far as Apple's revenue, they have been playing games with both the Irish and the US and not paying any taxes on billions in revenue by claiming it' not taxable here because the product is manufactured in Ireland and not taxable in Ireland because the intellectual property needed to manufacture it was thought up in Silicon Valley.

Is it ok for you to cheat on your taxes? Do you cheat on your taxes? Why should Apple?

I render unto Caesar only his due. And for some reason, it's always a bigger percentage of my earnings than that paid by the Fortune 500 or the one % ers. Any you can argue that's fair that the middle and working class should pay more. I disagree.

I'm not faulting the rich for using loopholes. I'm faulting them for using bribery and influence peddling to put loopholes in place that take a 35% rate to 9-12%. Is 35% too high? Yes. But even with a stated rate of 35% look at the budget. Cut the waste, the pork, and the welfare queens out. My taxes shouldn't subsidize big business. Every one should pay their fair share. You cry but socialism is great? The government should meddle in business? I say everyone pays a rate that balances out budget, no games. Do you disagree with the Republicans on this? Or, do you see this as a political witch hunt given Apple's politics?

Well allegnmtn, looks as if you've bought into Obama's "fair share" program!
First, good luck finding "fair share" in the Constitution!
BTW, Apple hasn't done anything illegal! YET!

Oh yeah! Keep believing that "fair" thingie!

Well FB, think the Republicans can get Apple as cheats? It does my heart good to see you turn your back on the party. You're not the sheeple I thought you were. We will have to disagree on the fair tax thing. Your TEA colleagues are disappointed as well I'm sure, but again, this is a good streak of independence on your part.

And who knows, with mid terms on the way and Obama seeming to be the Teflon man, maybe the GOP will look at ways to rebuild its base by reaching out to working people. They will need a lot of non sheeple to join the sheeple so don't give up on them yet.

So just curious, if you got your 10% flat tax rate, would you say no corporate loopholes?

"Everbody should pay their fair share."
What exactly is somebody's fair share allegnmtn?

For individuals could be. Who knows, you just grabbed a number. Big concern is, ...regardless of what the tax structure is will Big Govt ever act responsibly, and live within their means, or always run up a big debts regardless of how much money they take in? ONe of the richest communities in the USA resides in WA DC..the lobbyists, and the politicos, and they live around massive crime, and poverty. Every measure to reduce their numbers, and shrink their ugly influence is attacked by the left with strategies like "pushing granny over the cliff, and killing the kiddies" etc., etc.

Hoski choked...

Obama called others out on the tax rate. HE paid less than all of us. Once again he doesn't put up. As for Romney, he's given more to charity than you and Obama for a lifetime...which FYI..will bring down your rate.
The other GREAT LIE is Obama, with all his tax free perks (along with Senators and Congressmen)of golf outing, travel, food, etc...actually did pay less than Romney, you and I.
He takes a half million in cash and 10 times that in freebies he doesn't pay taxes on....stupid lemmings can't figure that out.

Subject: Conservatives/Liberals

Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter.

The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundation of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups:

1. Liberals; and

2. Conservatives

Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early humans were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.

Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement.

Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing the sewing, fetching, and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.

Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as girlie-men.

Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs, and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.

Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass. Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare.

Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't fair to make the pitcher also bat.

Conservatives drink domestic beer. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, Polymer Science PhDs, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, Physicists, police officers, corporate executives, athletes, Marines, and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.

Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America. They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get more for nothing.

Here ends today's lesson in world history: It should be noted that a Liberal may have a momentary urge to angrily respond to the above before forwarding it. A Conservative will simply laugh and be so convinced of the absolute truth of this history that it will be
forwarded immediately to other true believers and to more liberals just to ____ them off.

Allegnmtn..The way I see it is big corporations are provided tax breaks so they can keep the economy growing, and not have to be forced to layoff workers. Most of them pay plenty in local, state, and fed. taxes, and benefit communities greatly. Listen to Obama attack them, and they leave liberal states, and take their business oversees as well as move to other more favorable states. I've said this many times, and libs have no response. I lived in the Microsoft area in Seattle, invested in MSFT because it was a local upstart. Our lives revolved around MSFT to a great degree. MSFT early on provided stock to their workers rather than a higher Sillicone Valley salary that they could not afford to pay at the time. MSFT created 4,000 millionaires in that area of Seattle alone!!! I ran into a lot of them fishing, and many of them young people. Do you have a clue as to the benefit of MSFT's success to that area? Just the trickle down effect is enormous. The chances of that happening under OBAMA are virtually nil, and that is why we are so deep in debt. The left attacks BIG OIL as a villion for example. Do you have any idea what BIG OIL pays in the way of taxes to the Fed. govt every quarter?

I asked you first. How much tax money does Big Oil pay to those corrupt Federale"s every QT?...and they make duffus folks like you believe Big Oil is Greedy, and ruining the country. My example of Phil Mickleson...he pays more in taxes in ONE YEAR than you would pay in several lifetimes! And you've got the nerve to attack those folks as cheating.

Totally different situation given the exemptions Corporations are necessarily provided like expanding their business through capital investment. The country greatly benifits through economic expansion, and you are too slow of mind to understand that fact. Every worker in a corporation gets taxed, and then on top of that the corporation gets taxed if they show a profit. You libs, along with the support of your liberal backer, Warrem Buffet, created the impression that Warren's Secretary paid a higher tax rate than billionaire Warren Buffet paid. All deception. Buffet paid a high percentage on earned income just like his Sec that made $250K a year, by the way, did. Warren draws from INVESTED INCOME after INVESTING his disposable earned income. That rate is the same lower rate that Romney paid that you lied about as well. Invested income can be lost as well, and is encouraged for obvious reasons you don't seem to be able to get. You, and Obama are happy to deceive the "uninformed" ignorant voter into believing they are getting screwed by those rich folks. But you don't want to get it. That is obvious. And the results of your deception are where we are at today...big time in debt, jobs lost, and getting worse, not better.

Funny. I don't hate women they just have their shortcomings that Obama, and the corrupt left play to. The Granny off the cliff thing. "They're killin the kiddies" type thing. What they are doing is killing the country. And it ain't George Bush's fault.

Oh, OH, Hoski's mind went to sleep again.

Liberals do not want to answer questions regarding their support for such a failed ideology. They just want to attack the other side, and retain power. Right now liberals are gloating that Obama is not being held to account for Benghazi, or the fact he isn't being exposed on the FBI targeting the Tea Party. They could care less that he is corrupt. They accept corruption as how they rule/govern. The strategy is never to defend what they do, always to attack the messengers that question what they do.

"bowing to big business" That has a very bad liberal smell to it. Big business is composed of real working folks, and real investors many who depend on those investments for their retirement. The liberal elite, and especially Obama have portrayed "big business" as the ugly capitalist that has caused our economic problems. Nothing could be further from the truth. And the results of portraying Corporations in this way for political gain is devistating to our economy.

A slightly longer History of History

I know, I know, it seems right, and it sure makes you feel good, doesn’t it! It’s lovely and comfy when History reinforces our Myths, sanctifies our Decisions, and ratifies those Policies that are starting to seem Stupid but that we are Stuck with. But lots of what seems logical isn’t necessarily true. And much of what we hope becomes in time what we think. Just because your often-repeated History makes you feel good and fits what you want doesn’t make it right. Just because confident men with warm voices speak it on the radio does not mean that it is worth repeating. The real story isn’t so happy, and isn’t so simple. It also takes some more reading and, I’m sorry to say, a few big Words.

It’s true; once upon a time, beer was an important factor in a major shift in human endeavor—but there is much more to this Story.

Sure, the grain fermented in the jars, and sure it was lucky that you could still get that “not starving” feeling and that “kind of frisky” feeling when you drank it (and chewed it). And sure, those Conservatives were out there making meat out of the animals of the plain…but let’s look a bit closer. Where we left it, the callow Liberals were hanging out around the fire, engaging in effeminate activities, and hoping a Conservative would bring home another lump of protein for them to mooch. Things went well for a while. But, over time, the Conservatives brought home less and less protein. You see, staying in one place exhausted all the game, and the old gathering habits used up all the grain. And the comfortable stationary living generated many more mouths to feed, since, in their secure houses, fewer children were being picked off by dingoes.
Luckily, the liberals began to do something Conservatives thought was a dangerous waste of time: they thought! Oh, clever Liberals! Unable to match the brawny and confident Conservatives, they had to think or sink. And, if they remained unproductive, they noticed that the Conservatives would criticize them by day and then creep into their sleeping bags at night for a little Buggery. So, as a matter of survival, they began to notice things. So clever! they noticed that the grains of the field weren’t all that useful, growing in inconvenient places and yielding small and dying often. So they set out to solve that problem using their often maligned Domestication skills.
Since the Conservatives had little game left to hunt, they launched pogroms in the neighboring village. This made them hungry. The Liberals had to persuade them not to eat all the grain in a sitting. We can plant these grains, they said, and grow more and better food—if you can only hold your horses until next year, and maybe help out with the plowing and weeding. Then, they said, We can ferment the rest, on purpose, and trade it to the people in the neigboring village, if only you would desist killing them for sport. Hey! said the Conservatives. We are hunters, and if the game is gone what will we kill? Hush now, said the Liberals, listen to this: a comb and a brush and a bowl full of mush, and look! the tired and dirty Conservatives dropped off to sleep in their own dung.
This allowed the Liberals to experiment more with the wrinkled peas and figure out how to make lots and lots of food for everybody. See, the Conservatives had decided that Man wasn’t allowed to think and invent. That was Science and Science was Bad—if people could survive by their wits, by thinking and inventing instead of game-killing and pillaging and neighbor-sacking, why that would be a New Thing, and New Things are Bad! So they killed the Liberals who dared to play God by inventing things, and they killed the Liberals who wanted to write books, and they killed the Liberals who wanted to make music, and they killed the Liberals who came up with cockeyed philosophies about Love and Generosity. The liberals didn’t mind much, being girley according to the Law of the Land, but it was a nuisance being killed all the time.
It’s also true that many Liberals thought up the good killing methods, hoping that their contribution would spare them, but it did not; Conservatives realized that they could do as they wanted both because they were big and strong and because they dared. This was fun for Conservatives, at least those who didn’t starve or die in big wasteful Wars or consume themselves in their own grotesque and hypocritical Vices.

Liberals meanwhile made a terrible mistake. They believed that their Thinking made them equal to the Conservatives. Foolishly they imagined a social compact in which people contributed what they could, and that there was a balance in the world, and that what brawn and speed and the capacity for violence could not do, cleverness and teamwork and empathy and the capacity for understanding could do. Liberals imagined a world in which they worked together with the Conservatives to create a comfortable place for all. Silly Liberals! They were so wrong! Though they contributed much to the world and our societies, they were weaklings. Even after the time of chasing and killing game and contesting with the treacherous elements was gone, Conservatives continued to elevate violence and threats and manly sports to the fore of human endeavor. Why not? It was what they did best! And the Liberals let them! Foolish Liberals! Long after strength and endurance were necessary as tests of leadership, they were enshrined as the true measurements of a leader.
Liberals tried to adjust. They said, Sure! We’ll play along! After all, you need us! You’re stupid and hidebound and have no model of action or behavior but the past. We’re innovative and clever and try to look ahead. Silly Liberals! Long after societies were wealthy enough to guarantee, with slight sacrifice, the safety of their poorest and weakest and oldest members, Conservatives argued that to do so would reward the weak and the old and the poor and encourage the lazy. They said, Look at the lazy Negro! Look at the drunken Irishman! Look at the devious Chinese! I am sober, resourceful, and honest, and wealthy therefore! Their fathers were poor and so are they! My father was wealthy and so am I! Proof, it is Proof!
And they went their way, while the Liberals worried and wrung their hands and sat nervously at their desks, hoping that it wasn’t so, and writing that it wasn’t so, while the Conservatives knew it to be so, and then made it so, just in case it wasn’t so.
And when Liberals came to lead, they hid their Liberalness. The crooked became straight, and the rough places plain; the lame hid their poliotic legs under a blanket; the gay made merry with willing dumpy middle-aged wives, asthmatics caught trout and killed bears and the Conservatives smiled and said, He’s one of us! Huzzah!

Oh, foolish Liberals! You imagined that the self-evident Freedoms could no longer be ignored by hemophiliac simps and blueblood homophobic buggerers. You imagined a wigless society of Laws, of citizen soldiers Liberal and Conservative side by side, free from the grotesque hypocrisies of class and gender and religion. And you made it so, with directness and honesty! You took off the table God and King in one stroke of the pen! You stripped away the antiquated notion that might was right, and that men girley or otherwise were men of substance under the Law according to their talents! When the Republic was threatened, our citizens would fight for her; when the poor wept, the Republic would lift them up. And all, the aristocrat and the pauper, the Quaker and the Episcopal, the striding able giant and the gout-ridden geezer, would be given the merits of their backs and their brains and the Republic would thrive!
So those Liberals fathered our country on grand sentiments of freedom and liberty and All Men, and sat back happily to watch it work. Oh, foolish Liberals! For it is easier to speak a line of happy lies than it is to plow a line of virgin sod. What do you reap? Our nation is now a polarized mess where shallow recycled ideas pass for political dialogue and the old bigotries endure, indeed old bigotries proliferate, because the only test of a true Conservative now is that he or she will stand by the bigotries regardless. Because that is Conserving.
As all Histories do, this one now comes to the shaky ground of the Present. Among us now are all manners of men, but almost none of whom have recently faced their tusked dinner with only a spear. Yet we find many who are somehow certain that their hard-won meat is being stolen away. We hear the most wealthy and powerful of the entire Republic complain that they are being robbed in plain daylight by weaklings. We see men of immeasurable treasure grasping angrily at grains of rice and demanding that the poor return to true poverty.
For who can fail to see that the Conservatives spend and borrow to build big useless bridges in their districts? That the America Firsters go a-nation-building in the world’s shitholes with our hard-won treasure? That the crushing debts of tomorrow were financed by a three-branch majority of today? That the Conservatives are snooping joyfully into our families, our beds, our very words? That the liberals’ Big Government was smaller! That the liberals’ huge deficit was a surplus! That the truth has become variable; that even as Conservatives lament relativism as a pox on the land they practice the Relativist’s relativism in everything, including their faith. That ‘smaller, more caring’ government is a fever-dream? The ‘waste free’ New Libertarianism generates the grandest bastion of toadies and sycophants imaginable, a maggot-fest of oozing corruption, a laughable cess of cronyist desuetude? That the Conservative spouters of Values are stealing us blind then squealing on one another?
And to discuss it in this great and innovative forum of Democracy, that same shining Democracy we imagine to carry to the dark corners of the world, we use silly false stories, odd little folk-wisdomy talk-radio vignettes that play on expired cliches of loyalty to long gone verities of Party? We can do no more in our great political Conversation than slander one another and tell and retell comforting lies about what we mean? That to win Office in this great Republic is to prostitute ones self to the twin Phalli of Money and Sanctimony? That the only acceptable opinion is to label those who would disagree with you Thieves, Liars, or worse? That my Violence is the only acceptable response to your Violence, which is not an acceptable response to my Violence?
In History is hidden Idea, but only for those who read the story as if they have never heard it before.
What is that smell?

Ice9

PS--your 20 questions were answered a long time ago. You just don't understand the answers.