00101001

Assuming the conservative ethos of lower taxes still exists, why is the GOP so adamantly against extending the payroll tax holiday? Ending the holiday would effective increase taxes for about 160 million Americans, primarily those that are poor and middle class. Though we are in a deficit, the GOP fought long and hard for the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy (which Obama ended up compromising on) so, I'm curious as to why this is any different. The lost revenue that would result from extending the tax holiday could be offset by taxing the upper 1% a tad more; so, rather than increasing taxes on 160 million Americans, you only do it to a few citizens who can easily afford to pay a bit more.

Honestly, if you're a conservative, wouldn't you be in favor of lower tax levels? Besides, who'd increase taxes on the middle class during the holidays. Maybe the reason the GOP is against extending the tax holiday is that it was proposed by Democrats...

Have you ever noticed that our credit rating was just fine until the GOP took control of the House? Our rating is going to be downgraded again, so I wonder how many times it'll take until y'all realize that obstructionist political games don't work.

Remember how the GOP said they were against raising taxes? Well, they just proposed a payroll tax increase. The thing about this tax increase is that it raises taxes on the poor and middle class. So, middle class Republicans: How can you continue to support the GOP when, rather than letting the Bush tax cuts expire, they decide to raise YOUR taxes instead of theirs?

For the record, Democrats never proposed a payroll tax increase. All the tax increases they proposed would either be on the ultra-rich or on corporations who, through tax loopholes, pay zero taxes.

I'm going up to visit a friend (a really good friend) New York City and this is the last time I get to see her for a year (I'm going abroad) and I'm trying to do something memorable and special. Since I don't know the city very well, I figured I'd turn to yahoo to see if there are any ideas I've overlooked. Money is a little tight, but if I have to splurge a bit I'm willing to do so.

while in a long distance relationship; specifically about being attracted to her closest guy friend?

Ok, here's the rundown on things. I'm a college student and I've practically been in love with my best friend (a girl) for like a year (i've known her for two years). She's a long term boyfriend, in a long distance relationship for our entire friendship and I've been sure not to make a move (as they were pretty much set on getting married after college and she's my closest friend). The thing is though that the other day, she sent me an email (just to me, not to anyone else in our close group of friends) telling me that she and her bf decided to try and be friends, as they're both going abroad and won't see each other for at least an entire year.

The thing is though that about a month ago, she told me she wasn't attracted to me but I've sorta noticed a change in the past few days. She's been a bit more flirty around me (and not other guys), not overtly, but more so than normal. Essentially, while she was in her relationship I was her surrogate boyfriend so we have that close emotional connectivity that takes a while for most couples to develop and we both know that she's going abroad and we're prepared for that.

So the question is, does she like me and should I try and see if she wants to move past the friends stage?

Today, the Republican majority in the house passed a bill that rescinded the floor voting rights of delegates from US occupied territories as well as the District of Columbia... that means 6 votes are gone and, coincidentally, 5 of those delegates were Democrats.

Now, its one thing to gerrymander districts to ensure that seats aren't lost in the next election, but taking away the right of representation in congress is something else. I live in the district of columbia, I'm subjected to the same federal tax laws as everyone else in the United States, yet I have no say in how I'm taxed. Does that seem right, does that seem American?

So republicans, answer this question for me: If you all care so much about freedom and liberty and equal representation in government, why would you take away the voting rights of delegates in the house?

And for the record here's a bit of history about the voting rights struggle: The Democratic majority gave delegates floor voting rights in 1993, the GOP rescinded them in 1995, then the Democrats restored them in 2007.

now that the GOP is preventing middle class tax cuts from passing unless the tax cuts for the rich are extended (meaning $4 trillion in lost revenue over 10 years... thats a lotta dough), how do you feel about voting republican?

And before you respond expressing your belief in trickle-down economics, consider this: It didn't work during the Reagan presidency or the George W. Bush's presidency. I mean, the tax cuts have been there for 10 years and look at how good the economy did; obviously it didn't work. Unless you want your taxes raised so the rich can sit on piles of money, you might want to reconsider voting for the GOP.

Because if you don't, then are you willing to forgo your social security check, a police department, libraries, a fire department, and are you willing to drive on dirt roads to your job where you've worked 14 hour days since you were 8 years old? (Yes, labor reform came from liberals btw). And if you're a woman or a minority, would you be willing to give up your right to vote?

Everything listed above came from liberal reforms and ideology so to say that you're against the "liberal agenda" pretty much says that you are against all the reforms listed above.

I just saw Boehner's speech and it made me wonder... What makes one more American than someone else? Why is it that working class conservatives are more "american" than upper-middle class liberals? Who created this notion of Americanism and why should the American dream be limited only to a certain group of people?

So I'm somewhat confused on whether this girl wants to date me or not and since I'm slightly bored, I might as well let you all figure this out.

Here's some background info. We've been on 4 dates. Each has been wonderful, we get along very well, there's never a lull in conversation and we just generally feel comfortable around each other. The first two dates, we made out for like 10 minutes, and we kissed on the third date. But, inbetween the third and fourth, she said that she felt uncomfortable when we kissed in public and that she isn't looking for a serious thing at the moment (we both had that established though and agreed that we should take things slowly and see what happens). Here's the thing though. For the fourth date, she introduced me to her mother (we ran a few errands for her lol) and had me give her a back rub for about half an hour. I mean, we get along really well and I think that she's into me, it sure feels that way, but I don't know if she's fully put me in the friend zone or not so what do y'all think? If you need more info, just ask, I'll post it.

I invited a girl to go to a concert with me. We're gonna go and I bought tickets. I told her after I bought them that I made the purchase and she responded: "How much were the tickets? (I'll pay you back in the fall)".

I don't mind paying for her ticket at all, but don't want to make it seem like I assume this as 100% a date (we're both single right now). I was thinking of just giving the price and saying that i'm not worried about her paying me back or not (she is a lot more well off than I btw). I'm just curious to see what other people suggest, anyone got any ideas?

I just told one of my friends that had feelings for her even though she has a boyfriend. I'm not trying to take her from her boyfriend, but it was one of those situations where you gotta say how you feel sometimes. We're totally platonic in our friendship which is fine by me anyhow. So thats a little background on our situation. Anyways, I'll get to the point, her dad is in town this weekend and I don't know if I should mention maybe getting a bite to eat with them (I have never met him). It would be just the three of us most likely so potentially a little awkward. We are pretty good friends, but any suggestions on what I should do?

There is a difference... a kinda big, essential difference and it relates to economics.

Can anyone tell me what the difference is?

I've been getting tired of socialism and communism being thrown around like they're synonyms because they aren't. They are two completely different concepts and claiming that they're the same is just being ignorant.

I took the Navy (inventory, not the official one) PRT this morning. I passed pushups and sit-ups (65 and 86 respectively) but on the 1.5 mile run, my body shut down around 1.1mi because I was too dehydrated. My superiors are giving me a chance to retake the run tomorrow. Does anyone have any tips on how to make sure that I'm hydrated and increase my speed so that I pass the run tomorrow.

I'm in relatively good shape, I'm running a half-marathon next month, I'm just not very good with short distances. My best 1.5mi time is around 11:30-12. I need 11:00 at least.

My birthday is coming up this weekend and I had already made plans about 1-2 weeks ago to do something with about 3-5 people, nothing fancy or exciting. Everyone said that they had nothing planned and that it would all work out. This week, I found out that someone couldn't go because they made different plans with their other group of friends. I feel really disappointed and a bit hurt, but I don't know if that's just me or not. I want to talk to them about this as soon as possible but I don't want to come off as a "self-important" jerk and risk losing a friend.

What should I do?

...then wouldn't you want Obama's presidency to be a success? Because if he does well then America benefits.

So me and my friend (who i really like) are going to the opera at the end of the month. She has a boyfriend, but it's a long distance thing (she's on the east coast, and he's in the midwest). I was thinking about taking her to this relatively nice (but not overkill, i'm still on a college undergrad budget after all) restaurant beforehand.

The problem is is that I don't want to seem to forward and I don't want her to feel that I'm taking advantage of the fact that her bf isn't at our school (i'm not trying to do that, I just was able to get two tix for the symphony and wanted to go with a friend).

Would it be bad if I suggested that we go to this restaurant? I don't really want to put myself in an awkward position between her and her boyfriend, and even if I did, i'm not slick enough to (for lack of a better word) steal her from the bf. My only justification for the restaurant is that, since her bf isn't around for most of the year, she has no one to really take her out and do nice things with. But, other than that, I don't know what I should do...

As a poli-sci major going to school in DC, i pretty much live and breath politics so i'm relatively in the know on what's happening. That being said, I've never seen a single poll that has shown that the republicans will be able to reclaim a majority in the House and the Senate. You're going to gain seats, a bunch of them, so expect that, but it's highly unlikely that the Dems will lose the majority.

Or do all polls have a liberal bias? Because when you don't get the data you want, that's the de-facto response.

Why do conservatives, with little understanding or knowledge of economic theory, firmly believe that the market will just fix itself? There is factual evidence that, in large economies (such as the us) government intervention in the economy is a must and, while it may sound evil, the free market would just lead to society of monopolies. If there were no multinational corporations, only small-business, then little government intervention is the best solution; but because the large corporations add so many variables to the market, government regulation, oversight, and intervention, are the only way to keep the economy functioning.

In an industrial society, there is no such thing as the "free market", this isn't the 1800s anymore, as the world becomes more and more connected (economically speaking) and economies keep expanding, a more economically involved government is necessary