RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts.

RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

slvemike4u -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/10/2011 4:56:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: You know, it's really interesting how Republicans have portrayed this as a tax increase when it is actually the expiration of a temporary tax incentive If taxes go up next year that is an increase. And if the sun rises tomorrow morning....you are an idiot. By the way...there is every indication that the sun will indeed rise tomorrow,so......

tazzygirl -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/10/2011 5:00:59 PM)
Yep... perception counts for alot. Care to disagree with that? Im talking about voters and how they perceive things. Some fall into the category that its all because a black man is in the WH. Sort of like how some stated, when he was elected... Get your guns boys, there is a n***** in the WH

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/10/2011 8:42:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Sorry locked. But if you want the cuts to be on the backs of the poor and middle class, the rich have to give their share too. Then Blowboy better change his tune and get real with his definition of "rich", because nothing that taxes individuals/businesses making 250k-1MM is going to pass. And the way the Republicans keep bragging about how they wont do anything unless tax cuts are included for the rich and corporations are really helping their cause... the Democrats cause, that is. Beep, wrong answer. They are doing exactly what the conservatives AND INDEPENDENTS demanded last year. Allowing any tax increases will hurt them with those who will actually vote for them.

Musicmystery -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/10/2011 8:59:33 PM)
Really. Independents demanded tax cuts? That's gonna fix the deficit...more magic Reaganomics that started the debt skyrocket? Yeah. That must be it.

Marini -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/10/2011 9:45:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Locked, the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy were supposed to create jobs, a concept known as "trickle down economics." Reagan did the same thing. Guess what, both times they achieved absolutely fucking nothing. The rich took their tax cuts and did not, repeat DID NOT, invest it OR create jobs.Trickle down economics does not work now, and it never has. The truth can only set us free! ONLY A FUCKING REPUBLICAN OR CONSERVATIVE BELIEVES THE BULLSHIT LIE. The ONLY people that benefit are the rich. When you people actually learn that most of the people in this country make less than 250k, and get laid off when the RICH mother fuckers put their tax breaks in a fucking bank or in off shore accounts, MAYBE, just maybe you will actually learn what the people in this country need. The major supporters of the Republican party, the rich and big business have had so many tax breaks that it is breaking the back of the lower classes. Granted, Big Business has helped create jobs, IN OTHER FUCKING COUNTRIES. Yes, Yes, Yes 1000 times Yes!! Anyone that can't see the direct correlation to the unbridled outsourcing practices and policies,and the chickens coming home to roost, just doesn't want to connect the dots. [sm=goodpost.gif] Where oh where did all the jobs go?

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/10/2011 10:31:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Really. Independents demanded tax cuts? That's gonna fix the deficit...more magic Reaganomics that started the debt skyrocket? Yeah. That must be it. They most certainly were demanding spending cuts and continuation of the Bush tax cuts, and there was a swing of over 25 points from 2008 to 2010 amongst independents. But why let facts get in the way. And Reagonmics didnt start the debt explosion. It put off the debt explosion started by Johnson. "President Ronald Reagan's record includes sweeping economic reforms and deep across-the-board tax cuts, market deregulation, and sound monetary policies to contain inflation. His policies resulted in the largest peacetime economic boom in American history and nearly 35 million more jobs. As the Joint Economic Committee reported in April 2000:2 In 1981, newly elected President Ronald Reagan refocused fiscal policy on the long run. He proposed, and Congress passed, sharp cuts in marginal tax rates. The cuts increased incentives to work and stimulated growth. These were funda-mental policy changes that provided the foundation for the Great Expansion that began in December 1982." "Though Reagan promised deep cuts in domestic spending, that did not turn out to be the case. Indeed, overall welfare spending increased during the Reagan presidency -- primarily because Reagan could not overcome, even with vetoes and the bully pulpit of the White House, the spending impulses of Congress, which, after all, signed the checks. Throughout his two terms, he was confronted by Democrats still enthralled by the New Deal as well as Republicans (particularly in the Senate) still mesmerized by its political appeal." But why let facts get in the way.

SternSkipper -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/10/2011 11:24:01 PM)
quote: Bonehead is actually listening to us conservatives for a change, good for him. Bonehead? Who's that? When I was in college in boston that's what the Dorchester anti-busing crowd refered to black people as. You might want to be a little more selective in your speech. it might not just be the boston area where it has those connotations.

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/11/2011 12:22:30 AM)
"...Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) warned Friday that President Obama faces turmoil in the Senate and in his reelection campaign if he includes Social Security cuts in any debt-ceiling deal. The senators said the White House has not communicated effectively to Senate Democrats and they and their rank-and-file colleagues are being frozen out of the process. “I have talked to some of my colleagues, including some that you might not expect, who say if [White House officials] bring to the Senate a piece of crap that comes down heavy on working families and children and the elderly and they expect me to matter-of-factly vote for it, they'll have another thing coming,” Sanders said. He added that he would filibuster such a deal.

popeye1250 -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/11/2011 12:56:00 AM)
Jlf, have they even discussed ending "foreign aid" at $49 Billion a year most of which is stolen or maybe mothballing 4 to 6 Carrier groups?Or maybe cutting the State Dept by 50%? There's PLENTY of places to cut in govt!

rulemylife -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/11/2011 4:30:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Really. Independents demanded tax cuts? That's gonna fix the deficit...more magic Reaganomics that started the debt skyrocket? Yeah. That must be it. They most certainly were demanding spending cuts and continuation of the Bush tax cuts, and there was a swing of over 25 points from 2008 to 2010 amongst independents. But why let facts get in the way. And Reagonmics didnt start the debt explosion. It put off the debt explosion started by Johnson. "President Ronald Reagan's record includes sweeping economic reforms and deep across-the-board tax cuts, market deregulation, and sound monetary policies to contain inflation. His policies resulted in the largest peacetime economic boom in American history and nearly 35 million more jobs. As the Joint Economic Committee reported in April 2000:2 In 1981, newly elected President Ronald Reagan refocused fiscal policy on the long run. He proposed, and Congress passed, sharp cuts in marginal tax rates. The cuts increased incentives to work and stimulated growth. These were funda-mental policy changes that provided the foundation for the Great Expansion that began in December 1982." "Though Reagan promised deep cuts in domestic spending, that did not turn out to be the case. Indeed, overall welfare spending increased during the Reagan presidency -- primarily because Reagan could not overcome, even with vetoes and the bully pulpit of the White House, the spending impulses of Congress, which, after all, signed the checks. Throughout his two terms, he was confronted by Democrats still enthralled by the New Deal as well as Republicans (particularly in the Senate) still mesmerized by its political appeal." But why let facts get in the way. You certainly never let them get in your way. Let me try to help Willbeur. Facts involve citations and documentation. Random quotes from undocumented sources do not qualify. By the way, here is the Joint Economic Report from April of 2000. How surprising that a committee with a Republican majority would be crediting Reagan for all that is that is sunshine and goodness in the world. I mean really, this joke of a report could pass for the Republican Party platform. 2000 Joint Economic Report, majority views only April 2000, Staff report PDF - 330KB

Moonhead -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/11/2011 4:41:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SternSkipper quote: Bonehead is actually listening to us conservatives for a change, good for him. Bonehead? Who's that? When I was in college in boston that's what the Dorchester anti-busing crowd refered to black people as. You might want to be a little more selective in your speech. it might not just be the boston area where it has those connotations. From a long discredited Victorian notion that negroes have thicker skulls and so smaller brains, apparently. I think the last person to take that one seriously was Ian Flemming. (In Live And Let Die, if memory serves...)

BamaD -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/11/2011 5:15:22 AM)
I have heard the term bonehead all my life to describe stupid people and this is the first time I have heard even the implication that it had a racial connotation in fact every person I have heard it applied to was white.

jlf1961 -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/11/2011 5:18:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Really. Independents demanded tax cuts? That's gonna fix the deficit...more magic Reaganomics that started the debt skyrocket? Yeah. That must be it. They most certainly were demanding spending cuts and continuation of the Bush tax cuts, and there was a swing of over 25 points from 2008 to 2010 amongst independents. But why let facts get in the way. And Reagonmics didnt start the debt explosion. It put off the debt explosion started by Johnson. "President Ronald Reagan's record includes sweeping economic reforms and deep across-the-board tax cuts, market deregulation, and sound monetary policies to contain inflation. His policies resulted in the largest peacetime economic boom in American history and nearly 35 million more jobs. As the Joint Economic Committee reported in April 2000:2 In 1981, newly elected President Ronald Reagan refocused fiscal policy on the long run. He proposed, and Congress passed, sharp cuts in marginal tax rates. The cuts increased incentives to work and stimulated growth. These were funda-mental policy changes that provided the foundation for the Great Expansion that began in December 1982." "Though Reagan promised deep cuts in domestic spending, that did not turn out to be the case. Indeed, overall welfare spending increased during the Reagan presidency -- primarily because Reagan could not overcome, even with vetoes and the bully pulpit of the White House, the spending impulses of Congress, which, after all, signed the checks. Throughout his two terms, he was confronted by Democrats still enthralled by the New Deal as well as Republicans (particularly in the Senate) still mesmerized by its political appeal." But why let facts get in the way. Actually, if you want to talk facts, the majority of Americans wanted to extend the tax cuts on the middle and lower classes, not the wealthy.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/11/2011 2:18:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Really. Independents demanded tax cuts? That's gonna fix the deficit...more magic Reaganomics that started the debt skyrocket? Yeah. That must be it. They most certainly were demanding spending cuts and continuation of the Bush tax cuts, and there was a swing of over 25 points from 2008 to 2010 amongst independents. But why let facts get in the way. And Reagonmics didnt start the debt explosion. It put off the debt explosion started by Johnson. "President Ronald Reagan's record includes sweeping economic reforms and deep across-the-board tax cuts, market deregulation, and sound monetary policies to contain inflation. His policies resulted in the largest peacetime economic boom in American history and nearly 35 million more jobs. As the Joint Economic Committee reported in April 2000:2 In 1981, newly elected President Ronald Reagan refocused fiscal policy on the long run. He proposed, and Congress passed, sharp cuts in marginal tax rates. The cuts increased incentives to work and stimulated growth. These were funda-mental policy changes that provided the foundation for the Great Expansion that began in December 1982." "Though Reagan promised deep cuts in domestic spending, that did not turn out to be the case. Indeed, overall welfare spending increased during the Reagan presidency -- primarily because Reagan could not overcome, even with vetoes and the bully pulpit of the White House, the spending impulses of Congress, which, after all, signed the checks. Throughout his two terms, he was confronted by Democrats still enthralled by the New Deal as well as Republicans (particularly in the Senate) still mesmerized by its political appeal." But why let facts get in the way. Actually, if you want to talk facts, the majority of Americans wanted to extend the tax cuts on the middle and lower classes, not the wealthy. A slim majority, amazing since nearly 1/2 the people dont pay income taxes to start with.

Musicmystery -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/11/2011 6:14:56 PM)
The editorial is two years old, but it will help illustrate the idea-----AND the reasons: That 47% pay no federal income tax is disturbing — not for what it says about the non-payers but for what it says about the nation's broken tax system and how hard it will be to fix it. The people who pay no income tax aren't freeloaders or evaders; virtually all are simply doing what the law allows. That there are so many of them is the result of decades of deliberate, bipartisan tax policy. That includes an appropriately progressive income tax that levies a heavier burden on better-off taxpayers, and little or none on those with the smallest incomes. It includes tax credits such as the ones that reward people for having children and help lift some people above the poverty line by rewarding them for working. And it includes President George W. Bush's tax cuts, which removed 5 million people from the tax rolls while giving big cuts to upper-income people as well. More people owe no income tax this year because the recession has cost many people their jobs, and the tax cuts in the stimulus act — an idea conservatives preferred to spending programs — were potent enough to help push some people's tax liability to zero. Once the stimulus expires and the economy recovers, the number of non-payers should fall back toward the typical 38%. http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2010-04-16-editorial16_ST_N.htm

WyldHrt -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/11/2011 7:17:06 PM)
quote: He didn't make you try heroine for the first time or any other drug. FFS! Locked, unless you are referring to people having sex with a female hero, please fucking learn how to spell heroin! [>:]

Musicmystery -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/12/2011 4:29:38 AM)
Reagan, of course, faced a DIVIDED Congress for his first six years, with Republicans controlling the Senate. quote: But why let facts get in the way. Why indeed.

SilverMark -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/12/2011 5:08:31 AM)
Ok, so defense cuts aren't on the table for the Republicans http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/58661.html Restoring the tax cuts from Bush, isn't on the table for the Republicans http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/58630.html So, lets cut the funding for Social Security and Medicare? The Republicans, don't want to close the loopholes for big business in the tax code. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/58747.html They don't even want to outlaw Bailouts http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/58597.html So let's start over so Boehner can suck on Cantor's dick a little more? http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303812104576437892165205166.html Boehner is a fraud, if Cantor is the power as it seems, get the little ass to the table.... I know, let's just kill all the old people they are just a drain on society! I try very hard not to be too partisan, but in this case, it is really hard not to be. If Boehner ends up pissed off, if Cantor'ass is on fire, if Reid is so beside himself he actually looks like he has a pulse, and Pelosi is shooting lightning out of her ass, because a deal gets done and none of them are happy about it, America might be on the right fucking track!

erieangel -> RE: Republicans turn down budget deal with MAJOR cuts. (7/12/2011 6:20:25 AM)
quote: If Boehner ends up pissed off, if Cantor'ass is on fire, if Reid is so beside himself he actually looks like he has a pulse, and Pelosi is shooting lightning out of her ass, because a deal gets done and none of them are happy about it, America might be on the right fucking track! I heard it once said that any compromise in which parties are unhappy is usually, in the long run, the best compromise for the country. That said, I don't see how furthering tax cuts to corporations that already pay little or no income tax (or as in the case of GE, get million dollar refunds) helps the economy. If the Republicans are serious about lowering taxes on the "job creators" they will come up with a tax plan that provides a higher tax to start with and then tax cuts for job creation--it can even help small businesses by starting with say a cut for every 10-20 new hires. Those who don't create jobs in this country will pay more than those who actually do create jobs and the off-set will be that unemployment goes down, more people will be on the tax rolls and more people will have money to spend, furthering economic growth and more job creation. But the Republicans aren't about to support such a plan as it will hurt their top donors the most.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625