Democrats Vs Beer: Massive 1,900% tax increase on beer

Superfreak said:
yes "They" as in the five that are attempting this. You and the other trolls who wish to make this about 'well it probably won't pass so who cares' can go play elsewhere. We are discussing THIS proposal and how pathetic this proposal is. Thanks for playing.... but Dung finally admitted it was a load of crap. Now you can do the same.
Click to expand...

SF, you are propagandizing on how those "CRAZY MORON LIBERALZ?!!" all want to increase the tax on beer by 1900%. I doubt you could get a bare 25% to agree to it.
 
cawacko said:
This board does have a gift for making long threads out of simple issues. From a male perspective this tax on beer sucks. Not to hard to say and not a lot more needs to be said. Some idiot republicans in the south tried to or did pass a ban sex toys. Wtf? They are idiots. It's not a zero sum game. To say my side propsed something bad is not admitting defeat.'
Click to expand...

This is definitely one of the stupidest threads I've seen in a while. I love to watch people get all excited over nothing though. It's funny. Frankly, I hate beer, and don't really care about this at all. But I could see caring a little bit if you like beer and are poor. Anything beyond that is total delusion and quite hysterical.

I think the funniest part is an elitist like SF pretending to care about poor people. SF, I applaud your performance here, seriously. :clink:
 
Superfreak said:
yes "They" as in the five that are attempting this. You and the other trolls who wish to make this about 'well it probably won't pass so who cares' can go play elsewhere. We are discussing THIS proposal and how pathetic this proposal is. Thanks for playing.... but Dung finally admitted it was a load of crap. Now you can do the same.
Click to expand...


Finally? It was stupid from jumpstart. My only points of contention were (a) that the bill had not yet passed so talking about what "the Dems" did was nonsense and (b) that the bill was not representative of anything more than the policy proposals of these five people. I also noted my belief that this bill will not pass.

You seemed to take issue with people correcting the record, calling myself and others "apoligists" for pointing out the truth of the matter.


By the way, I can see your true colors and they's yella.
 
OMG Poor People's right to cheap beer is being threatened! And JUST LAST WEEK, it was poor people's right to cheap cigarettes under attack!

I DEMAND poor people have access to cheap beer and cheap cigarettes!

Health Care? You fucking commie! Try eating healthy!

Oh, here, take some cheap smokes and cheap beer!
 
Superfreak said:
yes "They" as in the five that are attempting this. You and the other trolls who wish to make this about 'well it probably won't pass so who cares' can go play elsewhere. We are discussing THIS proposal and how pathetic this proposal is. Thanks for playing.... but Dung finally admitted it was a load of crap. Now you can do the same.
Click to expand...

You're pretty hilarious today; probably too much caffeine.

You are not the arbiter of what "we" are discussing. Some of us - on an unauthorized basis - were discussing the repetitive pattern Dano has of generalizing & portraying all or most Democrats/liberals based on the actions of a small few, and how his threads often are presented in a dishonest way in this regard.

I hope we haven't offended you by having a side discussion on that. I mean, I really feel just awful about it now.
 
My health care plan for poor people:

Cheap beer and cheap cigarettes. They'll be too drunk to care about their low wages and crappy lives so they won't vote or organize, and they'll die of lung cancer before they can collect social security or medicare. It's perfect!
 
Darla said:
This is definitely one of the stupidest threads I've seen in a while. I love to watch people get all excited over nothing though. It's funny. Frankly, I hate beer, and don't really care about this at all. But I could see caring a little bit if you like beer and are poor. Anything beyond that is total delusion and quite hysterical.

I think the funniest part is an elitist like SF pretending to care about poor people. SF, I applaud your performance here, seriously. :clink:
Click to expand...

oh look, yet another apologist.

So from now on, if a Rep proposes a bill/law, no one should comment on it until it passes? Right? Those are the standards we are setting in place today? correct?

I simply pointed out that they did not tax wine or hard alcohol, which they are more likely to consume, that and point to the fact that yes, the poor who the Dems claim to support would get screwed by this policy. Not to mention the fact that it would take the side of the large corporate breweries (of which the big boys are now FOREIGN companies) over that of the small business owner.
 
Superfreak said:
oh look, yet another apologist.

So from now on, if a Rep proposes a bill/law, no one should comment on it until it passes? Right? Those are the standards we are setting in place today? correct?

I simply pointed out that they did not tax wine or hard alcohol, which they are more likely to consume, that and point to the fact that yes, the poor who the Dems claim to support would get screwed by this policy. Not to mention the fact that it would take the side of the large corporate breweries (of which the big boys are now FOREIGN companies) over that of the small business owner.
Click to expand...


I know, I'm outraged! I'm twice as outraged as you are, but too shy to show it. I'm fuming though SF, fuming!
 
Epicurus said:
You can really tell the partisans by watching who tries to sidestep or avoid condemning this.
Click to expand...


Out of curiosity, who has avoided condemning this? By my count, not a single person has said this is a good idea.

The discussion seems to have taken off when SF mistakenly asserted that the Dems passed this tax on beer, which they had not, and then he branded everyone that pointed out that he was wrong an "apologist."
 
Dungheap said:
Out of curiosity, who has avoided condemning this. By my count, not a single person has said this is a good idea.
Click to expand...

I'll reread the thread to be sure, but it looked like 1by and maybe Onceler completely tried to dodge this by changing the subject.
 
"So from now on, if a Rep proposes a bill/law, no one should comment on it until it passes? Right? Those are the standards we are setting in place today? correct?"

Strawman, Superfreak.

No one is suggesting it should go without comment. What I am suggesting - and I can't speak for everyone - is that the actions of 5 Oregon legislators, which haven't even come to fruition & likely won't, aren't cause for recriminations of "Democrats" with a capital D, and hyperbolic talk of all of the many taxes that those Democrats with a capital D are now "loading" onto the poor average guy, and to things like the stimulus bill.

The entire discussion on this thread is completely alarmist; I'm sure Dano is pleased, because that's his m.o.
 
Onceler said:
"So from now on, if a Rep proposes a bill/law, no one should comment on it until it passes? Right? Those are the standards we are setting in place today? correct?"

Strawman, Superfreak.

No one is suggesting it should go without comment. What I am suggesting - and I can't speak for everyone - is that the actions of 5 Oregon legislators, which haven't even come to fruition & likely won't, aren't cause for recriminations of "Democrats" with a capital D, and hyperbolic talk of all of the many taxes that those Democrats with a capital D are now "loading" onto the poor average guy, and to things like the stimulus bill.

The entire discussion on this thread is completely alarmist; I'm sure Dano is pleased, because that's his m.o.
Click to expand...


Well I'll tell you how I feel; I don't care.
 
Onceler said:
You're pretty hilarious today; probably too much caffeine.

You are not the arbiter of what "we" are discussing. Some of us - on an unauthorized basis - were discussing the repetitive pattern Dano has of generalizing & portraying all or most Democrats/liberals based on the actions of a small few, and how his threads often are presented in a dishonest way in this regard.

I hope we haven't offended you by having a side discussion on that. I mean, I really feel just awful about it now.
Click to expand...

LOL... I have no problem with the above... I do find it odd that so many tried to play this off as 'well I dont think it will pass so whats the big deal'
 
Onceler said:
Yeah, you better re-read it.
Click to expand...

Well, 1by and Darla completely dodged by changing the subject.

Watermark trolled for reactions and then said he opposed sin taxes.

You and Dungheap made some noise about how you didn't think it would pass, but I don't believe either of you actually said you opposed what the bill was trying to do.
 
Superfreak said:
LOL... I have no problem with the above... I do find it odd that so many tried to play this off as 'well I dont think it will pass so whats the big deal'
Click to expand...

Why is that odd? Like I said early in the thread, I doubt a week goes by when you can't find some lunatic Dem or Republican "proposing" something outrageous on a local level. The key is VIABILITY. If Oregon jumped on this & other states followed, then yeah - there would be a case you could make.

If it's just some dumb proposal that doesn't stand a chance, who cares?
 
Dungheap said:
Out of curiosity, who has avoided condemning this? By my count, not a single person has said this is a good idea.

The discussion seems to have taken off when SF mistakenly asserted that the Dems passed this tax on beer, which they had not, and then he branded everyone that pointed out that he was wrong an "apologist."
Click to expand...

I did not assert that anything had passed moron. I was discussing the proposal... you are the idiot that tried to spin a lil strawman from that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top