Republican Tax Nonsense

[Troublemane]

It's too big of a risk right now. If the Republican party continues to fracture, then we can divide up the Democratic party and have a full reform. There's simply too much at stake to allow Republicans to have anything to do with running the government.

I don't want my friends to die for nothing in Iran and/or North Korea because I voted Libertarian or Green on a piddly issue that can be taken care of by a movement within the party.

I think the democrats are going to lose BIG-TIME in november, the writing is on the wall. Its why nobody in the democratic party looking to be re-elected (except Charlie Crist) is wanting to be seen in public standing next to Obama, right now.

Let's see....there is the lawsuit against Arizona which is nothing more than political grandstanding, which the [democratically appointed BTW] federal judge is probably going to toss out. This IMO makes the Obamanites look like fools, who are wasting the taxpayers' money on ridiculous lawsuits just to appeal to their base (hoping it translates to votes)

...there is the blanket moratorium on drilling in the Gulf, and in Alaska, which has been batted down by one federal judge already, but has also done enough damage already. Both politically and economically. The jobs are already leaving the Gulf region for fear the moratorium will become permanent. Once gone they will not come back. Seems pretty stupid. If Obama wants to pay for his massive healthcare debacle...er, i mean reform....he will need all the tax revenue he can get, and shutting down the oil industry and sending them overseas seems an idiotic move.

....there is the ethics hearing on Charlie Wrangle about to start, which is pretty bad timing for democrats. This won't look good for Obama or the dems.

....cap and trade is out. One of the biggest shams attempted to be foisted on the american people was [successfully] brow beaten back, so the dems had to concede they didnt have the votes to attempt it. This may seem like a minor victory to us sane/rational folks, but to the far left it will be (i think) a major blow. They consider this of tremendous importance, and seeing the dems just give up on it will tick them off. It is my opinion that this will cause some in the enviro-commie movement to be critical of incumbent democrats and might make them lose a few supporters....

...dont forget we still are fighting two wars...the democrats in congress promised to end these wars, but havent. Obama promised to end them but has not. I think this will also translate into voter fatigue with the issue, and so bringing it up will be a touchy subject. Dont look for dems to even speak of it! If they do, it will probably be to justify the obscene deficit spending they have been doing.

...and finally, the cherry on top of the poo-poo sundae,...Obama stating categorically that the economy has shown definite signs of improving (and then wall street drops a bit)...he says that the stimulus plan created OR saved 3 million jobs (and then the jobless rate continues to rise)....it seems every time he talks about something related to jobs or the economy, the media reports the actual figures and shows him to be DEAD WRONG. How does this translate to the american people?

Do you think the millions who are out of work hear the president say the economy is actually improving, despite what you may have heard, and think GEE he must be right! I must be out of my mind!? Do you think the president's total lack of empathy with the reality everyone is facing makes the american people feel confident with his ability to lead the country ?

I think he demonstrates a continued lack of interest in getting america back to work, and is more interested in trying to force through congress a political agenda which is diametrically opposed by more than 60% of the population.

I think he is so out of touch with the plight of americans, because he and the democrats are so obsessed with trying to maintain their power that they are really not concerned with anything else. And ironically it is this fear of losing their power which will ultimately bring them down.:beach:

 

[justbehappy]

The Republicans have dug up the voodoo economics of the Reagan Years (when Reagan increased the deficit by 189%) in order to "justify" extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich. According to voodoo economics, tax cuts pay for themselves because they lead to a huge increase in tax revenues. Unfortunately, this has been disproven time and time again. Why do you suppose the Republicans are once again "justifying" tax cuts with voodoo economics?

Republican Tax Nonsense | Capital Gains and Games

Republicans suck and Democrats suck. But at least the Republicans arn't turning us into Socialists with national healthcare.
If you want to compare Bush and Obama - Obama's just as bad.

 

[justbehappy]

Because they are Republicans. They want to elevate the rich, and trample the poor. And make it difficult for the poor to become the rich.

And Democrats want to elevate the poor, and trample the poor. And make it difficult for the rich to remain rich.
Point?

 

[Smoke]

I think the democrats are going to lose BIG-TIME in november, the writing is on the wall.

It's entirely possible. Significant numbers of Americans are almost completely out of touch with reality, and in that situation a Republican victory is always a danger.

 

[LuisDantas]

I fear you hit in on the jackpot, Smoke.

 

[Revoltingest]

I fear you hit in on the jackpot, Smoke.

You might be mistaking his meaning. It's not that he wants them to vote Libertarian.....I think he wants'm to vote for Democrats.
Yeah, I know...out of the frying pan, & into the fire.

 

[Magic Man]

I think the democrats are going to lose BIG-TIME in november, the writing is on the wall.

Anything's possible. However, that's more a commentary on the effectiveness of propaganda.

Its why nobody in the democratic party looking to be re-elected (except Charlie Crist) is wanting to be seen in public standing next to Obama, right now.

Or at least that's how you see it.

Let's see....there is the lawsuit against Arizona which is nothing more than political grandstanding,

Yeah, that's all it is. It's certainly not an attempt to curb racial profiling and to let people keep their constitutional rights.

which the [democratically appointed BTW] federal judge is probably going to toss out.

Keep telling yourself that. It probably won't come true, but I'm sure it makes you feel better right now.

This IMO makes the Obamanites look like fools, who are wasting the taxpayers' money on ridiculous lawsuits just to appeal to their base (hoping it translates to votes)

Yes, we know that's your opinion. It's just too bad you base your opinion more on propaganda from the right and your emotions than from facts and real information.

I'm not going to bother with the rest of your post. It would take too long to point out the myriad of problems in it, I'm sure.

 

[Magic Man]

Republicans suck and Democrats suck. But at least the Republicans arn't turning us into Socialists with national healthcare.

That's true. That's why it's clear the Democrats are at least doing better than the Republicans. Although I'm guessing from the way you said it that you meant that second part as a bad thing. In that case, it seems you've gotten caught up in the propaganda, too. I will give the Republicans credit where it's due. They are masters of propaganda.

If you want to compare Bush and Obama - Obama's just as bad.

No. Obama may not be great, but he's still better than Bush.

 

[justbehappy]

That's true. That's why it's clear the Democrats are at least doing better than the Republicans. Although I'm guessing from the way you said it that you meant that second part as a bad thing. In that case, it seems you've gotten caught up in the propaganda, too. I will give the Republicans credit where it's due. They are masters of propaganda.

I'm not a Republican don't get me wrong, but do I favor Republicans more? Yes. And that is because they want small government.
I have a pretty good understanding of what Socialism is, and I find that national healthcare fits the definition.

No. Obama may not be great, but he's still better than Bush.

At least Bush actually cared about the people. Obama's only after his own agenda. He only cares what we think about stuff when it helps his popularity to listen to it. Even when the healthcare bill approval got down into the thirty percentage, he was STILL campaigning harder than ever for it. He doesn't care what WE want, he only cares what he thinks is right for us.

 

[Sunstone]

At least Bush actually cared about the people.

How do you know that? I got the impression Bush only cared about his own crowd of very wealthy and powerful people.

 

[Amill]

At least Bush actually cared about the people. Obama's only after his own agenda. He only cares what we think about stuff when it helps his popularity to listen to it. Even when the healthcare bill approval got down into the thirty percentage, he was STILL campaigning harder than ever for it. He doesn't care what WE want, he only cares what he thinks is right for us.

You're kind of contradicting yourself a bit. So Obama doesn't care about us....but he only does what he thinks is right for us...:areyoucra

This is one reason why I respect him. I'd rather have politicians willing to risk their popularity and their re-election chances than ones who are simply trying to continue their stay in Washington. That's just me though.

And what's your problem with government run programs? Especially ones like health care. Do you hate taxes going to public education too?

 

[justbehappy]

You're kind of contradicting yourself a bit. So Obama doesn't care about us....but he only does what he thinks is right for us...:areyoucra

Your right, it was a little confusing.
Obama is back and forth. If it's something he feels strongly about, then no one can stand in his way. As low as the approval for the healthcare bill got, he didn't care what WE wanted because he was so passionate about it.
When it's something he's not so passionate about though - he puts public approval first. People were complaining he wasn't doing enough about the oil spill, so he flies down here to basically interview people picking up the oil (which did absolutely nothing for the problem because all he learned was how bad it was - which he alread should've known) and got treated to a nice lunch. I live on the gulf coast and I know some of the people he talked to, btw.
But then, he realized he forgot about the healthcare bill! So he planned an 100 day healthcare campaign, simply to gain more approval for the bill, in the middle of the oil spill crisis...

And what's your problem with government run programs?

Other than he fact that I feel it is not the purpose of our government and not what our government was set up upon - I personally find it to be Unconstitutional. People take the General Welfare clause so loosely, with no regard to its intended meaning. Also, the framers of the Constituion were against welare. Shouldn't this prove that the clause was not meant to allow those types social programs?

Let's take what the word 'general' means as well:
Dictionary.com: of or pertaining to all persons or things belonging to a group or category
Merriam-Webster: : involving, applicable to, or affecting the whole
Thefreedictionry.com : Concerned with, applicable to, or affecting the whole or every member of a class or category

Does this not mean that any law enacted under the General Welfare clause must be for the whole of society? And not just for some?

Especially ones like health care.

I would also argue that national healthcare is not for the whole of society. The appproval rating was somewhere between 35-40% when the bill was passed, meaning it was not wanted by even the majority of the country. How can something be for the general welfare if there isn't even a majority supporting it?

Do you hate taxes going to public education too?

Personally, I don't see why we can't just pay for school. It would be the same thing as paying taxes for it really. It's kind of just unnecessary. It would work the same way as private and Catholic schools do, which many parents prefer their kids going to anyways. The country, with exception of a few is pretty happy with it, though, so I see no need to change it.

 

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi Smoke and Luis,

It's entirely possible. Significant numbers of Americans are almost completely out of touch with reality, and in that situation a Republican victory is always a danger.

I fear you hit in on the jackpot, Smoke.

And I wonder where conservatives get the idea that liberals are condescending elitist snobs? I just wish you guys could display this contempt you share for large swaths of the American voting public out in the open (like in campaigns of liberal office seekers) and see how well you do come election time.

 

[Smoke]

And I wonder where conservatives get the idea that liberals are condescending elitist snobs?

That's what stupid people always think of the people who point out their stupidity.

I just wish you guys could display this contempt you share for large swaths of the American voting public out in the open (like in campaigns of liberal office seekers) and see how well you do come election time.

Since I don't belong to any party, or even like any party, I'm not too worried about that.

And I hardly think you're in a position to affect any pious disapproval of displaying contempt for large swaths of the American voting public, since you do that on a daily basis. Just different swaths, Joe.

"Conservatives" always fuss and fume as if they, and only they, are the public. Like you have to be a moron to be an American.

 

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi Smoke,

That's what stupid people always think of the people who point out their stupidity.

Zing!

Since I don't belong to any party, or even like any party, I'm not too worried about that.

And I hardly think you're in a position to affect any pious disapproval of displaying contempt for large swaths of the American voting public, since you do that on a daily basis. Just different swaths, Joe.

"Conservatives" always fuss and fume as if they, and only they, are the public. Like you have to be a moron to be an American.

Sure, you are not a liberal and don't vote for the Democratic Party, yeah, right.

The difference is I want the politicians I vote for to be honest. This can't be the case with liberal politicians that share the snobbery you had just exhibited. If they were honest and actually told the voters how stupid they think they know they are they would get 10% of the vote.

I just think it would be refreshing for liberal (and come conservative) politicians to come out and admit their contempt they have for most Americans.

 

[Smoke]

I just think it would be refreshing for liberal (and come conservative) politicians to come out and admit their contempt they have for most Americans.

I think it would be refreshing myself, if liberals would openly express contempt for the mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging few who consider themselves the "real Americans." Certainly, conservatives have long expressed their contempt for everybody else.

Oh, and I am a liberal. That's why I can't always bring myself to vote for Democratic candidates.

 

[Magic Man]

I'm not a Republican don't get me wrong, but do I favor Republicans more? Yes. And that is because they want small government.

No, they don't. They want small government in some ways. Democrats tend to want less military, but more social services. Republicans want less social services (which is how they get away with saying they want less government), but they want more military. Also, they tend to go to the point of wanting less government even in ways where we absolutely need government.

I have a pretty good understanding of what Socialism is, and I find that national healthcare fits the definition.

Then you don't have a very good understanding of what socialism is, nor of the healthcare bill that was just passed (hint: it wasn't national healthcare). But more importantly, you don't understand socialistic policies' necessity in a good society.

At least Bush actually cared about the people. Obama's only after his own agenda.

Please tell me you're kidding. Either that, or I want whatever you're smoking.

He only cares what we think about stuff when it helps his popularity to listen to it. Even when the healthcare bill approval got down into the thirty percentage, he was STILL campaigning harder than ever for it. He doesn't care what WE want, he only cares what he thinks is right for us.

He doesn't care what some people think because he knows in some ways what this country needs. It's kind of like opposing slavery before it was generally opposed by people. The majority of people have healthcare, so it's hard to make them care. The same way most people are allowed to marry the person they want, so it's hard to make them care about same-sex marriage. Sometimes you have to go against what the general populace wants to do what's best for the populace. Of course, that's assuming the majority was against healthcare reform. I don't think that's the case.

Anyway, this doesn't support your point. Do you really think Bush went into Iraq and Afghanistan because it was best for the country? What about his presidency makes you think he cared about the people?

 

[Magic Man]

Your right, it was a little confusing.
Obama is back and forth. If it's something he feels strongly about, then no one can stand in his way. As low as the approval for the healthcare bill got, he didn't care what WE wanted because he was so passionate about it.
When it's something he's not so passionate about though - he puts public approval first. People were complaining he wasn't doing enough about the oil spill, so he flies down here to basically interview people picking up the oil (which did absolutely nothing for the problem because all he learned was how bad it was - which he alread should've known) and got treated to a nice lunch. I live on the gulf coast and I know some of the people he talked to, btw.
But then, he realized he forgot about the healthcare bill! So he planned an 100 day healthcare campaign, simply to gain more approval for the bill, in the middle of the oil spill crisis...

First, he signed the healthcare bill into law the end of March. The oil spill didn't happen until April 20. I think you have your timeline and facts a little mixed up.

Second, 'm not sure how these things contradict each other. Even if he went against the will of the people for the health care bill (which I don't think he did), that's because it was something that needed to be done (whether or not people approved of the final product). The oil spill was for PR purposes. I don't think that's a good example of what you were trying to claim about him. Do you have any examples other than the oil spill?

Also, the framers of the Constituion were against welare.

Source?

Does this not mean that any law enacted under the General Welfare clause must be for the whole of society? And not just for some?

They are. If you get laid off from your job, you can collect unemployment. If you then lose your house and car and everything else you own, you can get food stamps and other programs for the poor. I'm not sure how you think it's only for some.

I would also argue that national healthcare is not for the whole of society. The appproval rating was somewhere between 35-40% when the bill was passed, meaning it was not wanted by even the majority of the country. How can something be for the general welfare if there isn't even a majority supporting it?

First, because it wasn't for the general public. It was directed to help a group of people that isn't the majority.

Second, because there was a lot of misinformation spread about the bill.

Third, the approval rating for the bill went up after the bill was signed.

 

[Magic Man]

I know this was directed at Smoke, but I wanted to take a crack at it, too.

Sure, you are not a liberal and don't vote for the Democratic Party, yeah, right.

Just because you're a liberal doesn't mean you have to vote for Democrats. Democrats and liberals are two separate groups.

I just think it would be refreshing for liberal (and come conservative) politicians to come out and admit their contempt they have for most Americans.

Yeah, then they could be like pretty much all conservative politicians, who do this constantly with their love of "down-home, patriotic, small-town Americans" as opposed to those "unpatriotic, big-city, smart folks".

 

[T-Dawg]

I know this was directed at Smoke, but I wanted to take a crack at it, too.



Just because you're a liberal doesn't mean you have to vote for Democrats. Democrats and liberals are two separate groups.



Yeah, then they could be like pretty much all conservative politicians, who do this constantly with their love of "down-home, patriotic, small-town Americans" as opposed to those "unpatriotic, big-city, smart folks".

.... They literally use "unpatriotic, big-city, smart folks" as an insult? How does this NOT alienate voters? It sets themselves up to a standard of "patriotism" that they clearly can't meet, and only 20% of the population is in rural areas, and almost everyone considers themselves to be smart.

EDIT: Oh, wait, I remember now. I learned this at Boys State, where the govt executive class was taught solely by Republican advertisers: They only air such ads in locations where they would be beneficial, and hope that knowledge of the ad doesn't spread to other areas (and usually it doesn't).