3rdnlng Posted August 17, 2011 Author Share Posted August 17, 2011 (edited) The issue is that we taxpayers are giving the PA about 1/2 of their budget. They are using some of that money to pay convicted palestinian terrorists who are imprisoned in Israel a salary. That salary is based on their prison term. Their prison term is based on the wickedness of their deed(s). The question is, what do we do? Do we continue to pay them (the PA) and ignore the fact that they are encouraging terrorist acts? Do we cut off funding in its entirety? Do we insist that they stop paying the salaries before giving them any money? The issue is not that my headline said that the US was paying the salaries of terrorists when it should have said the US is funding them. The issue is whether or not we should allow this shameful paying of terrorists to continue. DCTom, you can call me dishonest all you want, but your continuing the harping on the exact wording of my headline rather than actually addressing the issue leads me to believe that intellectually you are all hat and no cattle. Edited August 17, 2011 by 3rdnlng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Apology is a sign of weakness here. NEVER admit that you're wrong. NEVER back off your gut position. Follow these rules and all will be well. Wow 2 SNAFU's in a row for me. I mean..... wtf do you know, you pointy headed, commie, bastard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Wow 2 SNAFU's in a row for me. I mean..... wtf do you know, you pointy headed, commie, bastard. Much better! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Apology is a sign of weakness here. NEVER admit that you're wrong. NEVER back off your gut position. Follow these rules and all will be well. Or even better: never be wrong to begin with. Like me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Wow 2 SNAFU's in a row for me. I mean..... wtf do you know, you pointy headed, commie, bastard. You will catch on. Strong comeback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outsidethebox Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Or even better: sit on the fence and swing both ways. Like me. Fixed it Nothing wrong with swinging both ways if that's your thing. Just sayin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Fixed it Nothing wrong with swinging both ways if that's your thing. Just sayin. In your Liberace-infested dreams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outsidethebox Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 In your Liberace-infested dreams. LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 ooh this could be a fun game of stringing the connection, how about 1. U.S. taxpayers - provided money to bail out the banks- who laundered Mexican cartel money- who killed thousands of Federales- So the headline should be "U.S taxpayers support killing of thousands of Mexican Federales" 2. U.S. taxpayers- provide money to contractors- who use the money to buy off the Taliban to allow supplies through- the Taliban uses the money to buy weapons to attack U.S troops. Headline "U.S taxpayers support the killing of U.S troops" 3. U.S. taxpayers provide money to Israel so if Israel engages in collective punishment or drops white phosphorus on people or attacks ships in international waters killing members from a fellow NATO country- Headline should be "U.S. taxpayers support Israels multiple War crimes" fun game but once you start you may never end. I can now think of a few examples of specific cuts the politicians should make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts