|
Or ask what the heck he means. I don't understand his tax breakdown at the beginning--you'd have to make a hell of a lot to pay 28K in federal taxes, and I'm sure if you did you'd own a house with more than a $3K property tax bill, so I don't know what he's blathering about. Maybe if he owns his own business he has to pay corporate taxes that high, but still, he'd be making a couple hundred thousand, at least.
As for his attempt to blame Congress for whatever bill he's whining about, Bush had complete control of Congress until two years ago, and after that he had full veto power, since the Dems had a bare majority and no chance of overriding Bush without strong Republican support--something very rare for any bill a Democrat would support. Almost nothing that happened during the Bush administration, in terms of legislation, wasn't fully supported by Bush. He's trying to use a typical Republican dodge by claiming that the president only signs tax laws and budgets. That's technically how it works, but the president in reality sets the budget priorities and tax code, and Congress goes along with it, except in the rare case of Congress being controlled by the opposite party with veto-proof numbers--something Bush never came close to facing.
As for Lieberman, he's just trying to get your goat. Lieberman was the opposite of Bush on almost every issue except the Iraq invasion and a few other foreign policy issues. I doubt any Republican thinks of Lieberman as "awesome" in any way other than at pissing off Democrats.
I'd still respond with a chili recipe. Given the lack of literacy the Freeper displays, he or she probably couldn't understand it, anyway.
|