DC Council rejects increasing income tax rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me, 12:08. First, there is not need to call me a lazy ass because I do not agree with the bag tax. For what it is worth, [b]I carried recyclable bags before it was required. I don't agree with excess taxing. Second, I did not say anything about skin color. You brought that up.

Hope it made you feel better to be assumptive and curse at an anonymous person. You should be ashamed.

Well, bully for you. Hip, hip, hoorah. If only the rest of us were even a tiny bit as wonderful as you...we can only hope to achieve your level of sanctimony.

[Anonymous]

what does OFLMAO mean? I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with former Chinese leader.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me, 12:08. First, there is not need to call me a lazy ass because I do not agree with the bag tax. For what it is worth, I carried recyclable bags before it was required. I don't agree with excess taxing. Second, I did not say anything about skin color. You brought that up.

Hope it made you feel better to be assumptive and curse at an anonymous person. You should be ashamed.

No I am not ashamed. You should be ashamed. You are lazy and selfish if you find that an extra tenor fifteen cents on your sixty-dollar grocery bill is an excess taxing. You don't need to get the bag. You can choose to carry your own bag or walk out of the store with your purchases in your hand. But, to call it a tax is disingenuous. You say you carried recycleable bags prior to the bag fee. You are paying a fee for the bag, just as you paid a fee for your milk. Do you really think those bags cost nothing prior to the fee. They cost plenty. The materials to create the bag. The cost to transport the bag. And the cost to the damage in the environment when the bags end up in the streams, rivers, gutters and sewers. Their was always a cost, now the city is making consumers pay for a small portion of the cost. Whine, whine, whine.

As for the skin color, well you chimed in with the other posters about the racial makeup of the city council. Therefore, you were tacitly implicit with their sentiments and now you know that it was Tommy Wells and not perhaps Kwame Brown who engineered the bag [b]fee.

You're a dolt. It is clear that the other poster is carrying her own reusable bags. Why is this not obvious to you? It is to everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me, 12:08. First, there is not need to call me a lazy ass because I do not agree with the bag tax. For what it is worth, [b]I carried recyclable bags before it was required. I don't agree with excess taxing. Second, I did not say anything about skin color. You brought that up.

Hope it made you feel better to be assumptive and curse at an anonymous person. You should be ashamed.

Well, bully for you. Hip, hip, hoorah. If only the rest of us were even a tiny bit as wonderful as you...we can only hope to achieve your level of sanctimony.

That's absurd. The only reason she mentioned it is because someone said she was too lazy to use them when in fact she already uses them. That's not sanctimony.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me, 12:08. First, there is not need to call me a lazy ass because I do not agree with the bag tax. For what it is worth, [b]I carried recyclable bags before it was required. I don't agree with excess taxing. Second, I did not say anything about skin color. You brought that up.

Hope it made you feel better to be assumptive and curse at an anonymous person. You should be ashamed.

Well, bully for you. Hip, hip, hoorah. If only the rest of us were even a tiny bit as wonderful as you...we can only hope to achieve your level of sanctimony.

That's absurd. The only reason she mentioned it is because someone said she was too lazy to use them when in fact she already uses them. That's not sanctimony.

It is bad form to brag about the good deeds we do and already using recyclable bags is doing a good deed for our planet. Of course, I bet she uses, or used, disposable diapers and they are not good for the environment.

[Anonymous]

[
You're a dolt. It is clear that the other poster is carrying her own reusable bags. Why is this not obvious to you? It is to everyone else.

Dolt right back at you. Now why do you not read the entire message instead of cherry picking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:what does OFLMAO mean? I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with former Chinese leader.

Probably "On the Floor Laughing My Ass Off", a variation of ROFL (Rolling On the Floor Laughing).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me, 12:08. First, there is not need to call me a lazy ass because I do not agree with the bag tax. For what it is worth, [b]I carried recyclable bags before it was required. I don't agree with excess taxing. Second, I did not say anything about skin color. You brought that up.

Hope it made you feel better to be assumptive and curse at an anonymous person. You should be ashamed.

Well, bully for you. Hip, hip, hoorah. If only the rest of us were even a tiny bit as wonderful as you...we can only hope to achieve your level of sanctimony.

That's absurd. The only reason she mentioned it is because someone said she was too lazy to use them when in fact she already uses them. That's not sanctimony.

It is bad form to brag about the good deeds we do and already using recyclable bags is doing a good deed for our planet. Of course, I bet she uses, or used, disposable diapers and they are not good for the environment.

She didn't brag. She was accused of not using them. She rebutted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[
You're a dolt. It is clear that the other poster is carrying her own reusable bags. Why is this not obvious to you? It is to everyone else.

Dolt right back at you. Now why do you not read the entire message instead of cherry picking.

OK then. You were also wrong about the poster chiming in on the race of the politicians she opposes. She did not. You, and Jeff Steele, did. She did not mention their skin color.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me, 12:08. First, there is not need to call me a lazy ass because I do not agree with the bag tax. For what it is worth, I carried recyclable bags before it was required. I don't agree with excess taxing. Second, I did not say anything about skin color. You brought that up.

Hope it made you feel better to be assumptive and curse at an anonymous person. You should be ashamed.

No I am not ashamed. You should be ashamed. You are lazy and selfish if you find that an extra tenor fifteen cents on your sixty-dollar grocery bill is an excess taxing. You don't need to get the bag. You can choose to carry your own bag or walk out of the store with your purchases in your hand. But, to call it a tax is disingenuous. You say you carried recycleable bags prior to the bag fee. You are paying a fee for the bag, just as you paid a fee for your milk. Do you really think those bags cost nothing prior to the fee. They cost plenty. The materials to create the bag. The cost to transport the bag. And the cost to the damage in the environment when the bags end up in the streams, rivers, gutters and sewers. Their was always a cost, now the city is making consumers pay for a small portion of the cost. Whine, whine, whine.

As for the skin color, well you chimed in with the other posters about the racial makeup of the city council. Therefore, you were tacitly implicit with their sentiments and now you know that it was Tommy Wells and not perhaps Kwame Brown who engineered the bag [b]fee.

Here I go on the bag tax. Stores pay for the bags. If you buy shopping bags I assume you also buy some plastic bag products for trash can liners . We use the plastic grocery bags. Marion Barry has made some hideous mistakes in his life but look how far he has come. He was the child of sharecroppers in a teeny town in Mississippi. Almost finished a doctorate in chemistry. The man must be brilliant.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
OK then. You were also wrong about the poster chiming in on the race of the politicians she opposes. She did not. You, and Jeff Steele, did. She did not mention their skin color.

There were two posters making similar points. I only responded to one. I don't know if that is the poster that you are discussing. At any rate, the poster to whom I responded suggested getting rid of a number of Council members who she accused of being the "old guard". It was also implied that this group was involved in attempting to increase income taxes. The racial connotations were not mentioned, but were clear from the list of Council members. First of all, the sponsor of the income tax increase -- who is white -- was not even listed. Two of those listed voted against the increase. Most members of the list are not from the "old guard" and in fact have sat on the Council for less time than many of the white members. So, the poster had not in fact compiled her list based on support or opposition to the tax increase, or legitimate membership in an alleged "old guard". All that the list members had in common is that they were black males. In fact, only one black male council member was left off the list. You may find this to be nothing more than a coincidence. I, on the other hand, think it is anything but coincidental.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But, how? Those people who don't work are the ones who vote Barry and the like on to the city Council. And, now they are tax carzy with the bag tax and the thankfully-sut-down beverage tax.

Oh, and the bag fee was sponsored by Tommy Wells, but he is a white guy from Alabama, so I guess it is okay. BTW, if your lazy ass could put two bags in your car when you go to the grocery store, you would not have to pay an extra ten cents. But, you need that ten cents to purchase your $6 latte.

I'm not the poster you are talking to, but you are way out of line.

just because someone opposes the bag tax doesn't mean they don't recycle. And opposing certain candidates does not mean you are white. I find your prejudices pretty disturbing.

You did not find those people disturbing. You did not find those people who vote for Barry are tax crazy disturbing. Well, your post speaks for itself and how you selectively find things racists and disturbing. Hmm, interesting

I would imagine that those who voted for Barry are overwhelmingly African American and your reference to this portion of the electorate as "those people who vote for Barry" can only be construded as a racist slur. You also call them "tax crazy disturbing", I confess this confuses me because those who voted for Barry do not implement policy or vote on the Council. Yes, Barry represents those who voted for him, but he also represents every one in these wards. The "bag tax" is a red herring.

[Anonymous]

Rule #1 from the liberal handbook of debate:

Always accuse your political adversaries of racism and whenever possible use arguments to divide the people in terms of race, gender and class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[
You're a dolt. It is clear that the other poster is carrying her own reusable bags. Why is this not obvious to you? It is to everyone else.

Dolt right back at you. Now why do you not read the entire message instead of cherry picking.

OK then. You were also wrong about the poster chiming in on the race of the politicians she opposes. She did not. You, and Jeff Steele, did. She did not mention their skin color.



Okay give me a break and all the other intelligent people who can read. The poster listed every Black male on the city council as members who had to replaced. Other than their gender and race the members had nothing else in common. The poster did not mention any of the white male councilmembers as members who needed to be replaced. She mentioned old guard, but the council members for whom she mentioned are not old guards, but the white males she conveniently failed to mention are old guards. So what part did you not comprehend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rule #1 from the liberal handbook of debate:

Always accuse your political adversaries of racism and whenever possible use arguments to divide the people in terms of race, gender and class.

Glen Beck, welcome! You cannot defend the indefensible.