Agreed, on both counts.
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2007
- Messages
- 6,100
- Reaction score
- 1,562
I don't need a CPA to tell me the same thing. All I have to do is look at my records from before the tax cuts and after. While it is not a huge amount of money it is a noticable amount and could impact my guns, ammo, and accessories budget.
OK, slow down and read my post again.
1) I never said she had an affair, I said her 'affairs while married' meaning anything that she did while married (even though the trooper admitted to unprofessional conduct and resigned because of it) I meant affairs, not marital affairs.
2) I know she claims to be pro 2A but she also swore to uphold the constitution and didn't follow up on that very well either.
3) my world of perfection, as you call it, is smack on. She violated the constitution pure and simple. Even Dr. Tom admitted to doing it. I don't want or expect a perfect candidate but I do expect one that will follow their oath of office.
Your personal relationship or knowledge of her does not make her a good candidate or make my comments stupid. Did she violate the constitution or not?
I am set in my ways. I actually believe that when a representative violates the constitution they should be punished not rewarded. Even if that means giving their job to someone I don't like.
Yeah, well, you're not the only one going to get pregnant if the taxes revert.
I don't care what they name it or who takes the blame, the tax increases will get me too. Under the previous (Clinton) tax policy, I was officially declared "rich" although I think that is a crock, and more than a few will find their taxes going up.
I will only be "rich" in money in Somalia.
I doubt I'll be affected but I don't like seeing the G take more cash out of people's paychecks.
Michael Brown
I doubt I'll be affected but I don't like seeing the G take more cash out of people's paychecks.
Michael Brown
Well, the net effect will be that I will lay off people. The only two places I really can control are payroll and advertising and they are my two biggest expenses. I have trimmed some of my ads with no ill effect on the amount of business, but don't want to cut any more for fear of losing any. It's a vicious circle, you need staff to run the cases, but you need cases to pay for the staff. One of these days, I am going to write a book about lawyer advertising.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...kins-1236.html
Rasmussen Poll(9-23-10) shows Fallin up by +26
Rasmussen Poll(9-23-10) shows Fallin up by +26
what i was told was "half of advertising is a waste of money, problem is you dont know which half"....i wish i had my wasted half back...
It has been my experience that those that vote based on a single issue usually wonder later why there is a bullet hole in their foot.
If one is going to vote a single issue then the 2nd's the one to do it with.
A politician's stand on the 2nd tells all about the way they feel about the people.
To make a long discussion short:
Pro 2nd equates to trust of the people.
Anti 2nd equates to lack to no trust of the people.
We can all do our best to vote more than a single issue but when push comes to shove the 2nd is the bell weather. If a pol isn't pro 2nd they don't get my vote and that means pro 2nd by deed as well as word not the weasle pro 2nd most dems including the obamanation pretend to be.
