NEWS FLASH! - Ms. Sheehan Supports the War, Maybe
Disclaimer: The following is more boring political commentary, a collective effort of the Cow Barn Druidry and we take full responsibility for the contents, maybe.
Ms. Sheehan pays taxes, maybe. If she does pay taxes, then some of her taxes may be appropriated to support the war, maybe. So ipso facto, Ms. Sheehan supports the war, if she pays taxes.
Beans and peas are the same difference, or very nearly the same difference. But what you say and what you do may not be the same difference, atall. For example, some have alleged that all the money providing support for the war is borrowed from foreign parts and interest won't be due on the loans for quite a spell, so if that's true, nobody now alive supports the war except for those folks providing direct aid to the troops via personal monetary contributions and the troops themselves, maybe. Now for a second example. In this example we assume that the first example does not reflect reality and that the money used for the war actually comes from the taxes of those now alive. And this example is Lomo. Let's say Lomo doesn't pay any taxes. It doesn't matter why Lomo doesn't pay taxes, the point is, that because Lomo doesn't pay taxes, Lomo doesn't support the war and can't support the war unless he makes a personal monetary contribution that does somehow support the war. Now for a third example, Senator Kerry. Senator Kerry is among the rich and powerful, so taxes for him are optional. But we have a feeling he probably does pay some taxes because if he didn't pay taxes, or if he didn't apparently pay some taxes, lotsa people would be aggravated with him. So again, if example one is false, Senator Kerry supports the war if he pays taxes.
Now let's talk quantitatively about support for the war. And again, for any of this to make sense, example one above, must be false. All of us that pay taxes support the war. Perhaps because that is our patriotic duty, but also because most of us are not among the rich and powerful, and consequently, we lack the option on paying taxes. But those of us that do pay taxes pay different amounts. So those that pay less in taxes support the war less, than those who pay more. (Surely, even the most ignorant and vulgar among you can see this).
Finally, we have the special case of those that participate in the prosecution of the war. If they, the war prosecuters, pay taxes, they support the war. If they contribute personally, financially to the war, they support the war. If they don't pay taxes or make personal financial contributions to the war, then they don't support the war. It's that simple.
As we spell it, the earmark magic, spells long in the making, of the Kinglet and his Ministers and his Host of Minions, obscures to invisibility, their say and do.
Ms. Sheehan pays taxes, maybe. If she does pay taxes, then some of her taxes may be appropriated to support the war, maybe. So ipso facto, Ms. Sheehan supports the war, if she pays taxes.
Beans and peas are the same difference, or very nearly the same difference. But what you say and what you do may not be the same difference, atall. For example, some have alleged that all the money providing support for the war is borrowed from foreign parts and interest won't be due on the loans for quite a spell, so if that's true, nobody now alive supports the war except for those folks providing direct aid to the troops via personal monetary contributions and the troops themselves, maybe. Now for a second example. In this example we assume that the first example does not reflect reality and that the money used for the war actually comes from the taxes of those now alive. And this example is Lomo. Let's say Lomo doesn't pay any taxes. It doesn't matter why Lomo doesn't pay taxes, the point is, that because Lomo doesn't pay taxes, Lomo doesn't support the war and can't support the war unless he makes a personal monetary contribution that does somehow support the war. Now for a third example, Senator Kerry. Senator Kerry is among the rich and powerful, so taxes for him are optional. But we have a feeling he probably does pay some taxes because if he didn't pay taxes, or if he didn't apparently pay some taxes, lotsa people would be aggravated with him. So again, if example one is false, Senator Kerry supports the war if he pays taxes.
Now let's talk quantitatively about support for the war. And again, for any of this to make sense, example one above, must be false. All of us that pay taxes support the war. Perhaps because that is our patriotic duty, but also because most of us are not among the rich and powerful, and consequently, we lack the option on paying taxes. But those of us that do pay taxes pay different amounts. So those that pay less in taxes support the war less, than those who pay more. (Surely, even the most ignorant and vulgar among you can see this).
Finally, we have the special case of those that participate in the prosecution of the war. If they, the war prosecuters, pay taxes, they support the war. If they contribute personally, financially to the war, they support the war. If they don't pay taxes or make personal financial contributions to the war, then they don't support the war. It's that simple.
As we spell it, the earmark magic, spells long in the making, of the Kinglet and his Ministers and his Host of Minions, obscures to invisibility, their say and do.
posted by ray pistrum at Saturday, January 28, 2006
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home