Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

DEBT: Social spending isn’t the problem

Letter by Michael Dole, Tacoma on Aug. 15, 2011 at 12:50 pm with 88 Comments »
August 15, 2011 2:46 pm

Re: “Get the facts straight about the debt crisis” (letter, 8-14).

It’s refreshing to see someone on the right make a fact-based argument, however this letter is full of half-truths.

The author states that federal revenue is “up 23 percent over the past 20 years.” However, he cites raw numbers that don’t take into account gross domestic product during that time.

A more accurate analysis would be to look at revenue as a percentage of GDP (which describes the size of the economy). The Office of Management and Budget reports that current federal receipts are about 14.5 percent of GDP, a ratio the United States hasn’t seen since 1950. In truth, our level of federal revenue is at a 60-year low.

The author also takes a dig at social spending. The high cost of Medicare is due to skyrocketing health care costs, which have nothing to do with Medicare itself. Education spending (as a percentage of GDP) has barely budged over the years, but the author lumps all social programs together as if to argue they’re equally to blame and then compares them to a single program – defense – which is misleading.

In truth, what drove the deficit over the edge was irresponsible overspending by Congress during the 2000s. Two overpriced wars (one unnecessary), huge tax cuts that promised jobs but produced none, an expensive Medicare program not paid for – all followed by an economic collapse made possible by the systemic deregulation of the financial sector by conservatives.

That was (and is) the problem – not social programs.

Tags:
Leave a comment Comments → 88
  1. aislander says:

    Yes it is…

  2. What’s next? “neener neener”?

  3. aislander says:

    Went fishing. Got a bite…

  4. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    The Office of Management and Budget reports that current federal receipts are about 14.5 percent of GDP, a ratio the United States hasn’t seen since 1950.

    Oh, 1950… you mean back when the top marginal rate was 87%?

    So how did that ”tax the richey” stuff work out for ‘ya back then?

    And gee, you don’t suppose showing revenue as a percentage of GDP would be just a tad bit skewed by the current rotten economy, do ‘ya?

    Damn statistics.

  5. LarryFine says:

    Hi “tigsort” welcome aboard snailer.

  6. LarryFine says:

    … oops.

    I meant sailor.

    ;)

  7. klthompson says:

    “huge tax cuts that promised jobs but produced none”. I suppose the writer can state a source for that assertion. The problem with statistics produced by government agencies is the age old axiom. Figures don’t lie but liars can figure.

  8. aislander says:

    If it had been a salmon rather than a bullhead, my follow-up would have been different. But I really expected the bullhead. Lot more common, doncha know?

  9. LarryFine says:

    … he won’t get it ai.

  10. LarryFine says:

    … neither will alt.

  11. tigsnort says:

    “And gee, you don’t suppose showing revenue as a percentage of GDP would be just a tad bit skewed by the current rotten economy, do ‘ya?”

    Not really. Except for a slight blip in ’09, GDP has grown since Republicans brought down the economy.

    “”huge tax cuts that promised jobs but produced none”. I suppose the writer can state a source for that assertion”

    Uh, look around you.

  12. aislander says:

    Those tax-cuts “saved or created” MILLIONS of jobs. Can I prove it? No. Can you disprove it? No. Same goes for the “stimulus…”

  13. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    tigsnort says:

    “And gee, you don’t suppose showing revenue as a percentage of GDP would be just a tad bit skewed by the current rotten economy, do ‘ya?”

    Not really. Except for a slight blip in ’09, GDP has grown since Republicans brought down the economy.

    Uhh, yeah… I think Rip Van Winkle would like his bed back.

    First of all your ”slight blip in ’09” was the largest drop in GDP in over 50 years.

    http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_kd_zg&idim=country:USA&dl=en&hl=en&q=us+gdp+growth#ctype=l&strail=false&nselm=h&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_kd_zg&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=country:USA&ifdim=country&hl=en&dl=en

    Understatements like that are tough to follow, but you managed to do so with aplomb with your laughable cliam that GDP has grown since then. In fact, there have been as many quarter-over-quarter declines as increases since 2009.

    http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growth

    But please, don’t stop now… I love made up stuff. (You don’t drive a Toyota by any chance… do ‘ya?)

  14. tigsnort says:

    Those tax cuts have been in effect for a decade. We are at 9% unemployment. The “Job Creators” have not used those tax cuts to create jobs as promised. They continue to sit on the money. Supply-side theory disproven. Tax cuts and spending cuts don’t create jobs in a recession. In fact spending cuts destroy jobs. Increased consumer demand creates jobs. People only buy things when they’re working. New jobs are needed and if the “Job Creators” aren’t gonna create them, the government has to. Otherwise get used to the recession cause it’s gonna be around for a loooong time.

  15. tigsnort says:

    Vox_clamantis_in_deserto:

    GDP in 2008 was 14.4 trillion.
    In 2009 it dropped to 14.1.
    In 2010 it rose to 14.5.
    In 2011 and beyond it’s projected to keep going up.

    When it dropped in ’09, revenue dropped right with it. So there’s no “skewing of the data”.

  16. aislander says:

    Negative growth is the definition of “recession,” and we were in one. Torpid growth is the definition of the Obama administration…

  17. aislander says:

    Returning to Clinton-era tax rates will have NO effect on the “Super-Rich” (sic), merely those of us who would like to become ordinary rich…

  18. K-L-T,
    How about 9.2% unemployment while Corporations are hiring like mad overseas, are reporting record or near record profits.

    Islander,
    If a return to the Clinton-era tax rates would have NO effect on the super rich, why do all the lap-dot Rpots pledge to not raise taxes.
    This is where l-f would stat yipping about your lost lunch.

  19. concernedtacoma7 says:

    When your wealth is well beyond double digit BILLIONS, why would you care how much they took from your current earnings? Aside from the philosophical debate Over whether you or the govt should spend your money, the standard of living for Buffet or his next 5 generations are not affected by increased taxes.

    The small business owner making $251k, now that guy and his offspring will be greatly affected.

    Why is there no talk of a billionaire tax? Instead they make the threshold low enough to effect the barely well off. It is about class warfare an politics, not economics.

  20. aislander says:

    xring: You have really become the master of the non sequitur…But, to answer the question I THINK you were asking: conservative Republicans are advocates for those who would like to BECOME rich, not of the super rich. That’s why all the super rich I can name are Dems (Gates, Buffett, Soros, Kennedy, Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstein, et many al), except for the infamous Koch brothers who commit the heinous crime of supporting conservative causes…

  21. “Stop Coddling the Super-Rich”

    one – they are free to write a check to TurboTax Timmy anytime they want to.

    two – if you believe in the concept that states are labortories of democracy, then I can not think of a recent case where revenue projections were met when the “rich” were taxed.

    three – it is not the governments money. It never has been and as long as we have a Constitution, it never will be the governments money to do with as you and you family wishes.

  22. from the Buffet Op-Ed:

    “If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine — most likely by a lot.”

    I believe most of us on this discussion board make our money from the latter, the result of our labor and the time needed to produce a product or a service from that labor.

    The key is to move from making your money with your back to making your money with you brain and place that process on autopilot.

    I agree with aislander that, the tax system is skewed to make it difficult for you to “become rich” than it is to keep you “rich”. On a side note, I am reminded of a list that showed the “richest” 15 of 20 Senators were Democrats… I was actually surprised considering all the garbage coming from the keyboards of people who believe the GOP is nothing more than a rich boys club. Of the two train wreck parties, I do have to place my hard-earned money that the GOP will set policies to get out of my way so that I can BECOME rich.

    (PS – for all you gripers about oil companies, why don’t you just invest in an oil company. Those evil b-tards make all the money don’t they? Or is your money in windmill farms… hmm well you might actually start making a little cash as they are moving over to the land of Great Wall and probably will start at least balancing their books… those b-tards acting like an evil corporation.)

    It is also amazing to me still, that a group of people keep advocating to take more money away from a small group of people, instead of “allowing” a larger group of people (you, me) to keep more of their own money in a best attempt to move themselves and their family to the “rich” whatever the heck that is anymore.

    Using the government as a henchman to take money away from a small group of people will not make your existence from paycheck to paycheck any less miserable. It will only make who you send your money to – turboTax Timmy – only larger, more intrusive to feed their growth and give them more control over your money and in turn your lives.

    Don’t you and your spouse want the ability to manage your lives and the finances needed to build the life you want?

  23. Not sure how, as Buffet recommends, raising tax rates on those whose income is more than a $1 million a year is somehow going to prevent anyone from becoming rich……

  24. The Dems HAVE proposed restoring the pre-bush rates only for those earning 1, 5, or 10 million – AND all were shot down by the Rpots.

    That sure makes it look like the R’s favor the rich, and not just the wanna-be rich.

    The 2011 ttop two tax brackets:

    33%
    Single $174,401 – $379,150
    Married – jointly $212,301 – $379,150
    Married – separate $106,151 – $189,575
    Head of household $193,351 – 379,150

    35%
    Single – over $379,150
    Married – jointly over $379,150
    Married – separate over $189,575
    Head of household – over $379,150

    Islander,
    So the many have to pay to support the dreams of the few?

    Or do the good/needs of the many outweigh the desires of the few?

  25. aislander says:

    xx98411: I’ve asked numerous lefties what the critical mass is when it comes to taking somebody else’s stuff. Can ten people see a “need,” spot someone with “more than he needs,” and vote to take his stuff? Does it take a hundred? What’s necessary to make theft moral? I’ve yet to receive a persuasive, coherent answer…

    beerBoy: It’ll help keep the riffraff out of Buffet’s club…

  26. the infamous Koch brothers who commit the heinous crime of supporting conservative causes…

    <if it were only limited to "support"……

  27. aislander – I just thought I asked the question… never meaning for it to be rhetorical… oh well, the discussion continues…

    Its bad enough when the “poor folk” say give me your money but the part that kills me is that Warren Buffet appoints himself spokesman for the “rich” people… kinda hoping it is a John Belushi/Animal House moment to slap him back to reality.

    Starbucks Shultz may have seen some sort of light… he is calling on the big money to lock the wallets and resist campaign funding…. we’ll she how that goes.

  28. And is if only the Koch brothers supported right wing causes.

  29. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Compared to Soros the Koch bros are small time.

  30. aislander says:

    I didn’t mean to repeat your post, xx, but I’ve found you can never ask that question too often. I’m hoping to get a lefty response sometime during the current millennium.

    The thing about it is that–no matter the number of takers–you have to deal with the principle involved. If you admit it is wrong for ten or hundred or a thousand people to appropriate the property of others, the whole principle of doing so is put into question, and, as I mentioned above, it is a principle that is very difficult to defend…

  31. concernedtacoma7 says:
    August 16, 2011 at 12:14 pm
    Compared to Soros the Koch bros are small time.

    http://www.forbes.com/wealth/forbes-400#p_2_s_arank_-1_

    Soros is the 14th most wealthy American. The Koch’s are tied for 5th. Their combined income – $42 billion – makes Soros’ $14 billion look pale

    Another myth debunked

  32. “taking somebody else’s stuff”

    Hyperbolic, to say the least

    The government is not “taking someone’s stuff” (unless it is a case of eminant domain, which is rare). Taxation is as old as society since there is infrastructure and someone has to pay for it.

    It is this kind of garbagespeak that makes the Conservative movement look ridiculous to rational thinking people.

  33. aislander says:

    concernedtacoma7: I think the “myth” is that ANYONE has an income of $42 billion. And, if the Koch brothers have accumulated wealth of $42 billion, that means that each has $21 billion. IF Soros has $14 billion, that puts them into the same ballpark…

  34. aislander says:

    So, LarryFine: Is money property or isn’t it?

  35. “On a side note, I am reminded of a list that showed the “richest” 15 of 20 Senators were Democrats… I was actually surprised considering all the garbage coming from the keyboards of people who believe the GOP is nothing more than a rich boys club.”

    Compare the real wealth of the Senate GOPs versus the Senate Dems and see what the total is. Remove John Kerry from the list (who “married well” after being in the Senate) and see where the totals head……

  36. aislander says:

    As for “infrastructure,” LF, that was not the discussion. We’re talking about taking one person’s property and giving it to another person. That’s immoral if I do it as an individual, and it’s immoral if a mob gets together to do it…

  37. “aislander says:
    August 16, 2011 at 1:07 pm
    concernedtacoma7: I think the “myth” is that ANYONE has an income of $42 billion. And, if the Koch brothers have accumulated wealth of $42 billion, that means that each has $21 billion. IF Soros has $14 billion, that puts them into the same ballpark…

    When the Kock Brothers start politically opposing each other, I’ll consider their wealth separate. Together, they could break Soros.

    I can always depend on Concerned to deny a source like Forbes and promote the Heritage Foundation.

  38. Oh…I see….I used the word “income” where I should have said “wealth”.

    My bad….Concerned’s folly for dodge

  39. “The government is not “taking someone’s stuff” (unless it is a case of eminant domain, which is rare). Taxation is as old as society since there is infrastructure and someone has to pay for it.

    karnos – if you don’t pay a tax bill, they will take it from you one way or another… it will be paid in some form. That being said we have a large group of people demanding that a small group of people pay more using the tax system as the method of payment.

    Ok, they aren’t “taking someone’s stuff”… at least not yet… but they sure are demanding that small group pay more… or else…

  40. “Compare the real wealth of the Senate GOPs versus the Senate Dems and see what the total is. Remove John Kerry from the list (who “married well” after being in the Senate) and see where the totals head…… “

    “real wealth” as opposed to the wealth that they are required to disclose… dude the figures were from the disclosure forms they are required to provide every year (?) or so…

    “real” as opposed to fake…? wtf is that?

  41. aislander – if repetition is what it takes to get the point across or get an answer from them then repeat away… one day we’ll get an answer…

    I dig this concept – “That’s immoral if I do it as an individual, and it’s immoral if a mob gets together to do it… ”

    It is not about protecting the rich for me. It is, as you say, it is immoral to demand that a small group of people who pay more than their fair share, to pay even more. And the excuse for the demand of payment is we can’t control our spending.

  42. LarryFine says:

    Soros is an American ? Kooky…

  43. aislander says:

    When it comes down to it, xx, the justification for using government to take from our fellow citizens is: “They can afford it.” That is hardly the moral high ground.

    I am becoming ashamed of my country for that reason.

    A nation founded on the principles of freedom and opportunity has become a kleptocracy…

  44. aislander says:

    Hey, LF–thanks for letting me bounce some ideas off you..

  45. concernedtacoma7 says:

    http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/topindivs.php?id=D000000186&Display=SC&ContribID=U0000003477

    So the Koch bros donated about $2mil over decades. Soros blows them out the water with 2 donations, NPR and Media Matters. He donated 1mil alone to support prop 19.

    Not the best site but here are some numbers on Soros. http://www.newsmeat.com/billionaire_political_donations/George_Soros.php

    End of the day Soros donated significantly more than the Koch bros. Try again Kard.

    “Soros was not a large donor to US political causes until the 2004 presidential election, but according to the Center for Responsive Politics, during the 2003–2004 election cycle, Soros donated $23,581,000 to various 527 groups dedicated to defeating President Bush. A 527 group is a type of American tax-exempt organization named after a section of the United States tax code, 26 U.S.C. § 527.”

  46. aislander says:

    …and there were all those donations to Obama’s 2008 campaign that came in at just UNDER the $250 per that required disclosure of contributor’s names. I’m sure that was sheer serendipity, but I’m also sure it would not be difficult to program a computer to take $100 million (say) and divide it by 400,016 to sneak below the threshold, and send those contributions to the one…

  47. aislander says:

    …or that one…

  48. Soros became a naturalized citizen (just like Orly Taitz) in 1961.

    Nothing like a conspiracy theory to malign Soros.

    Everyone knows that Koch money is behind dozens of PACs

    Oh…and Media Matters isn’t a PAC or a political campaign. NPR is a non-profit radio broadcasting company that none of the Conservatives on this forum can identify on the local market.

    I love how you compare Koch’s party/candiate donations and then lump everything that Soros does (couldn’t you find his donation to the Girl Scouts?)

  49. 88.5

  50. xx….why should you get the privilege of living in the United States and not have to help pay the freight?

    I’m amused at how you Conservatives are always complaining about “paying for someone else” but you don’t want to pay for yourself.

  51. xx……and????? Who owns “88.5”?

  52. :::::humming Jeopardy theme::::::

  53. aislander says:

    Hey, xx, I don’t paying for the “freight” train, just not the one with all the passengers getting a free ride!

  54. Well…I can see this is where xx suddenly gets quiet.

    The signal from 88.5 on the radio dial is from KPLU, owned by Pacific LUTHERAN University that “liberal” school that has this rule, regardless of age of resident:

    ” Alcoholic Beverages: The use or possession of alcoholic beverages is prohibited on campus and in the residence halls. Empty alcohol containers and brewing equipment are similarly prohibited.”

    I’m sure the Lutheran Church has become a spokestool for Socialism.

    So much for the NPR/socialist propaganda myth………

  55. concernedtacoma7 says:

    KARD, what is your obsession with NPR? So it is broadcasted from a college that you descibe as conservative. Your point is what? That does not change their content.

    “Kevin Klose, president emeritus of NPR, who received more than $1.2 million in compensation, according to the tax forms the nonprofit filed in 2009.”

    All so Kard can listen to the left wing news of the day from a soothing voice (or watch his Sesame St).

  56. aislander says:

    concerned: Why am I suddenly reminded of King Julien XIII, proudly crowing over minor “victories?” Never mind, it’ll come to me, but if it doesn’t: so what? It’s not at all important…

  57. “xx….why should you get the privilege of living in the United States and not have to help pay the freight?’

    I am glad you asked that question and I would direct it at the 47% who pay no federal income tax.

    You conservative bs is just that BS… you are starting to sling the brown stuff.

    PLUease… enough with the BS NPR questions.

  58. exactly aislander, I am more than happy to pay for my seat on the train, I just didn’t reallize how many other seats I was paying for.

  59. concernedtacoma7 says:

    He has been trying for weeks to get someone to bite at that NPR question. I was enjoying it falling on deaf ears the whole time.

    I do not see the right asking to not pay their fair share. As you have both have correctly pointed out, the issue is paying for someone else’s free ride.

    I’ll post this again for Kard

    “and that benefit dependency was becoming a substitute for wealth-creating employment” Krugman 101

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/janetdaley/8685945/If-we-are-to-survive-the-looming-catastrophe-we-need-to-face-the-truth.html#.Tj6fMd3hYL8.mailto

  60. Excellent letter; accurate and to the point. The righties don’t like it though because it is the truth and they cannot directly refute it.
    Sort of like global warming in that regard.

  61. aislander says:

    Any HONEST economic analysis would admit that revenues as a percentage of GDP are down because of the economic contraction we are experiencing, and that there was a net gain in jobs during the Bush admin UNTIL that contraction. The TRUTH is that Obama admin measures have been spectacularly ineffective in turning around the economy and, therefore, tax revenues and employment…

  62. Concerned – let me see if I get this…..

    You are now using a Conservative British publication as your source to tell the US what is wrong with their system?

    How’s things in Great Britain lately? No fighting in Ireland…..but……

  63. “concernedtacoma7 says:
    August 16, 2011 at 4:17 pm
    He has been trying for weeks to get someone to bite at that NPR question. I was enjoying it falling on deaf ears the whole time.

    It was a great opportunity for me to watch you CONS avoid the simple truth that NPR is no more a liberal tool than you are. It makes for great blah blah….but like most Conservative talking points….no substance to support the claim.

  64. “Kevin Klose, president emeritus of NPR, who received more than $1.2 million in compensation, according to the tax forms the nonprofit filed in 2009.”

    And the market value of being a network CEO in radio is????? Limbaugh got a $400 million contract and he is “just an entertainer” as you Cons are inclined to say

    I’m still trying to figure out why a Lutheran college would compromise their values for a “socialist” radio programming network.

  65. “concernedtacoma7 says:
    August 16, 2011 at 4:00 pm
    KARD, what is your obsession with NPR? So it is broadcasted from a college that you descibe as conservative. Your point is what? That does not change their content.”

    My obsession???? I listen to their jazz programming and “Car Talk” primarily. Now you, on the other hand, claim to know so much about them…..but…..you’ve never listened…….hmmm….

    Probably one of those GOP talking points in the brain…..

  66. “It was a great opportunity for me to watch you CONS avoid the simple truth that NPR is no more a liberal tool than you are. It makes for great blah blah….but like most Conservative talking points….no substance to support the claim.

    I know I haven’t been around in a while but this NPR crap has been going on for a while… nobody is answering the questions your professorial self provided becasue no one cares… where it is on the dial is irrelevant to the conversation. So what I provided three numbers, please discussion board forgive, I was hoping it would shut him up and more the conversation forward.

    wishful friggin’ thinking… jesus, man give it a rest, no one cares about NPR except to defund the b-tards. It is that simple at times.

  67. theglovesRoff says:

    I was going to say something about public and polago sounding like XTP and sumner. but I decided not to.

    Carry on

  68. theglovesRoff says:

    that would be publico

  69. LarryFine says:

    … I try to stay out of your way Aislander…

  70. concernedtacoma7 says:

    “How’s things in Great Britain lately? No fighting in Ireland…..but……”

    Maybe we should watch and learn. Generations of entitlement society lead to …..

    Here’s more food for thought for all of you who think we need to be France or England

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903480904576510200756243420.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

    And the author of the previous piece is a reformed American hippie who saw the light. Its never too late Kard.

  71. “reformed American hippie”…..LOL

    Concerned – tell us the characteristics of a “hippie”

  72. I came to the conclusion today that observing glover/LF on this forum is much like watching Harpo Marx.

    Harpo never said anything but just scurried around making noise with his horn just to agitate everyone else.

  73. “no one cares about NPR except to defund the b-tards”

    Speak for yourself. One of your brethern (actually two, but unfortunately one passed away) constantly brought up NPR as a “tool of the leftist movement”.

    Neither knew a damned thing about the local NPR affiliates (yes, there is more than one), had never listened to the station, yet KNEW it was a leftist plot. What NPR is about to a Conservative is the equivilant of the truth about Obama’s birthplace – they crow about it, until the truth is shoved up their…uh…nose and they can no longer tell the lies. KPLU is about 75% jazz music, and the rest is minimal politics and other feature material, plus, the funniest program on the air – Car Talk. The whole Conservative BS about “leftist programming” is nothing more than one more Conservative LIE.

    As to defunding, there is nothing a Conservative would love better than to defund EDUCATIONAL RADIO AND TV. Both are a threat to control of the masses.

  74. Why am I suddenly reminded of King Julien XIII

    ……because there is no one other than larsman on this board who is more obsessed with arcane history?

  75. LarryFine says:

    Could this thread fall any further off the rails ?

  76. aislander says:

    King Julien XIII is the vainglorious lemur king from the movie “Madagascar,” who thinks himself much more grand, powerful, and effective than he really is. SUMthing reminds me of him. Or snailthing does…

  77. Perry, Bachmann, and Romney.

  78. aislander – This may seem a bit odd but the fact that you referenced a cartoon has actually raised my esteem for you (and I’m not being snotty). Though I love animation I haven’t seen Madagascar – the snippets I have caught seemed rather manic.

  79. A hippie is a Premature Anti Conservative.

  80. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Since she was at Berkley in the 60’s, stating she saw hippie is no strech of the imagination.

  81. Harpo never said anything but just scurried around making noise with his horn just to agitate everyone else.

    but Harpo was funny…….

  82. aislander says:

    Saw “Madagascar?” I OWN “Madagascar!” My daughter was the right age when it came out…The only thing I don’t like about it is the insistence of its creators on pronouncing the “a” in the final syllable. THAT is a schwa. Like any good cartoon, it has elements that appeal to different age groups…

  83. aislander says:

    concernedintacoma writes: “Since she was at Berkley in the 60’s, stating she saw hippie is no strech of the imagination.”

    Two of my female cousins were at Berkeley in the ’60s and were at the family reunion I attended a couple of weeks ago in Spokane. You should have seen their reactions (and that of most of the rest of my benighted family) when I told them I sympathized with the Tea Party! Another cousin is a teacher from Wisconsin, and she almost fainted dead away…

  84. theglovesRoff says:

    KARDNOS says:
    AUGUST 16, 2011 AT 9:52 PM

    Harpo never said anything but just scurried around making noise with his horn just to agitate everyone else.

    You know, this applies to you as well. Your posts make a lot of noise, don’t really say anything, and agitate everyone else. Fits you like a kard…..

    ;-)

  85. aislander says:

    Sorry. That should have been directed at concernedtacoma7…

  86. aislander says:

    LarryFine writes: “Could this thread fall any further off the rails ?”

    Does the whole “Madagascar” thing answer your question, LF?

  87. Yosemite Sam and Rocky were quoted on another thread (of those two I think the former is a more believable cartoon character).

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0