Bernie Sanders .... Tax rate 90%

[*bfine32*]

(06-03-2015, 12:28 AM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: You seem to have no clue what the phrase "talking in circles" actually means, but I'll ignore that distraction and remind you that I didn't offer any charts, figures, numbers or "breakdowns" of defense spending. Not sure why you're asking me to defend what somebody somewhere else said to you.

I stated that The Weekly Standard "purposely" opted not to reveal which programs they consider welfare. I came to that conclusion because clearly the author of the post 1. knows how to type 2. has a computer and 3. can communicate clearly in the English language. And yet he failed to tell us what he considers "welfare", which would have allowed us to make sure he isn't including programs nobody else would call a welfare program in his numbers. Do you conclude that the author accidentally  didn't tell us what programs he considers welfare?

I conclude that the author maybe as biased as many on here (we may never know). 

However, my original point was that the Defense numbers were taken at face value and not called into question; however the Welfare number were as soon as they were posted and continue to be by posters such as yourself.

Quick breakdown:I’ve got a cousin on welfare; he gets a free cell phone. I got a son in the Navy, he has to pay for his.