RE: It's gonna be NASTY.

RE: It's gonna be NASTY. (Full Version)

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

Message

tazzygirl -> RE: It's gonna be NASTY. (1/22/2012 4:38:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Oh, so we didn't lose half a billion dollars to a politically connected solar firm?! Good to know! Learn new stuff here every day! [8D] Firm Putting words into my mouth again?

tj444 -> RE: It's gonna be NASTY. (1/22/2012 4:42:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Oh, so we didn't lose half a billion dollars to a politically connected solar firm?! Good to know! Learn new stuff here every day! [8D] Firm It doesnt actually say that.. it does not appear that the extent of cost to taxpayer is known yet.. it just debunks the claim that the loan was a pay-off for Obama support.. "Now taxpayers could lose hundreds of millions of dollars." "For now, though, information in the public record does not support the ad's claim that the Obama White House is a pay-to-play cash machine for the politically well-connected. "

FirmhandKY -> RE: It's gonna be NASTY. (1/22/2012 5:15:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: Solyndra was what, exactly? (besides a big $500 million boo-boo) http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2011/nov/15/americans-prosperity/solyndra-ad-president-barack-obama-taxpayer-money/ I wish people would fact check claims before making them No need to put words in your mouth. tj said there was a $500 million dollar "boo-boo", and you attempted to make appear that this was not true. If we didn't lose the money, I'd like to see Solyandra write the US Treasury a check. What are the odds, you think? [8\|] Firm

tazzygirl -> RE: It's gonna be NASTY. (1/22/2012 5:21:07 PM)
That post was in response to this.... Supplementing Mitt`s income with bush`s millionaire special tax-cuts so Mittens can pay only 15% is where the money is getting wasted. Get your government waste straight before you go attacking Social Security Medicare and our safety net. Probably the greatest propaganda victory was duping a shit-load of middle-class/working class Americans that their government was the source of their problems. Solyandra is always something conservatives bring up at this point. And the facts are not quite as cut and dry as you would like them to be. The same with Beacon Power... but have you bothered to look into that one either?

FirmhandKY -> RE: It's gonna be NASTY. (1/22/2012 5:21:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Oh, so we didn't lose half a billion dollars to a politically connected solar firm?! Good to know! Learn new stuff here every day! [8D] It doesnt actually say that.. it does not appear that the extent of cost to taxpayer is known yet.. it just debunks the claim that the loan was a pay-off for Obama support.. "Now taxpayers could lose hundreds of millions of dollars." "For now, though, information in the public record does not support the ad's claim that the Obama White House is a pay-to-play cash machine for the politically well-connected. " Her link is to a site which attempts to put the best face on the situation. The facts show that political connection did indeed play a part. Was it a straight "I'll give you campaign money for the loan" deal? Of course not. Too easy to find out and track. But the fact is the Bush admin turned them down. The Energy Departments own internal analysis said it was a loser. The Obama admin gets elected, a few phone calls to the White House, a few emails ... no doubt a few private personal meetings that we'll never learn about ... and not only is the "deal" back on the table, it's pushed through, and then the terms are even changed to put the taxpayer last, in event of any "problems". That's just some of it. Proved in a court of law? Nahhh. And never will be, one way or the other. As long as ideologues can throw enough FUD into the mix (i.e. tazzy's source), then they can claim "unproven!". As she did. Firm

FirmhandKY -> RE: It's gonna be NASTY. (1/22/2012 5:23:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl That post was in response to this.... Supplementing Mitt`s income with bush`s millionaire special tax-cuts so Mittens can pay only 15% is where the money is getting wasted. Get your government waste straight before you go attacking Social Security Medicare and our safety net. Probably the greatest propaganda victory was duping a shit-load of middle-class/working class Americans that their government was the source of their problems. Solyandra is always something conservatives bring up at this point. And the facts are not quite as cut and dry as you would like them to be. The same with Beacon Power... but have you bothered to look into that one either? Your post was not in response to what you quoted above. It was directly in response to what tj wrote. For gawds sakes, you quoted her directly! [8\|] Go back and read it. I've quoted it directly above in post 123 for your ease. [8D] Firm

tazzygirl -> RE: It's gonna be NASTY. (1/22/2012 5:44:37 PM)
her post was a direct response to the post I quoted. quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: Isnt what his father and him have done the American dream? And in the process crushed how many other dreams of Americans while he ravaged corporations? I only hope he ravages government, and wasteful spending as well as he did business if he wins. Supplementing Mitt`s income with bush`s millionaire special tax-cuts so Mittens can pay only 15% is where the money is getting wasted. Get your government waste straight before you go attacking Social Security Medicare and our safety net. Probably the greatest propaganda victory was duping a shit-load of middle-class/working class Americans that their government was the source of their problems. Solyndra was what, exactly? (besides a big $500 million boo-boo) I have read that Newt was the impetus for the reduction in captial gains tax.. that and.. Fifty percent of Speaker Gingrich’s tax plan goes to the top 1 percent I cant say i blame anyone (including Mitt) with paying only what is legally required and investing that way.. I personally feel the mortgage interest tax break is unfair to non-homeowners but thats the law.. And Obama did decide to renew the various tax breaks and did not raise the capital gains tax, he had the chance to keep his political promise.. rated as a broken promise [sm=popcorn.gif] Now you are going to try and slam me for trimming quotes as we are often told to do?

FirmhandKY -> RE: It's gonna be NASTY. (1/22/2012 5:45:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl her post was a direct response to the post I quoted. [8\|] Beam me up, Scottie!

tazzygirl -> RE: It's gonna be NASTY. (1/22/2012 5:46:32 PM)
I agree, you are obviously lost.. hell, even she got what you didnt [8\|]

tj444 -> RE: It's gonna be NASTY. (1/22/2012 5:52:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Oh, so we didn't lose half a billion dollars to a politically connected solar firm?! Good to know! Learn new stuff here every day! [8D] It doesnt actually say that.. it does not appear that the extent of cost to taxpayer is known yet.. it just debunks the claim that the loan was a pay-off for Obama support.. "Now taxpayers could lose hundreds of millions of dollars." "For now, though, information in the public record does not support the ad's claim that the Obama White House is a pay-to-play cash machine for the politically well-connected. " Her link is to a site which attempts to put the best face on the situation. The facts show that political connection did indeed play a part. Was it a straight "I'll give you campaign money for the loan" deal? Of course not. Too easy to find out and track. But the fact is the Bush admin turned them down. The Energy Departments own internal analysis said it was a loser. The Obama admin gets elected, a few phone calls to the White House, a few emails ... no doubt a few private personal meetings that we'll never learn about ... and not only is the "deal" back on the table, it's pushed through, and then the terms are even changed to put the taxpayer last, in event of any "problems". That's just some of it. Proved in a court of law? Nahhh. And never will be, one way or the other. As long as ideologues can throw enough FUD into the mix (i.e. tazzy's source), then they can claim "unproven!". As she did. Firm yes, for now it cant actually be proven,.. that is the way it is, innocent until proven guilty.. it may or may not be proven in the future.. who knows (on someones death bed, perhaps? lol).. All I know is that in the end it will cost taxpayers some amount of money.. and there were people at the company that knew they were about to shut the doors.. Just like Bush saying he didnt know he was lied to about Iraq, Obama can say he was lied to about Solyndra.. the same source disproves her claim that Mitt has offshore bank accounts (he has overseas investments but not bank accounts) and various others (like ravaging businesses etc). Dont ya just love politics! [:D] http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jan/13/winning-our-future/king-bain-video-accuses-romney-hiding-his-fortune/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jan/13/winning-our-future/video-blames-bain-capital-demise-kb-toys/

tazzygirl -> RE: It's gonna be NASTY. (1/22/2012 6:00:12 PM)
quote: he same source disproves her claim that Mitt has offshore bank accounts (he has overseas investments but not bank accounts) and various others (like ravaging businesses etc). Dont ya just love politics! Although it is not apparent on his financial disclosure form, Mitt Romney has millions of dollars of his personal wealth in investment funds set up in the Cayman Islands, a notorious Caribbean tax haven. Tax experts agree that Romney remains subject to American taxes. But they say the offshore accounts have provided him -- and Bain -- with other potential financial benefits, such as higher management fees and greater foreign interest, all at the expense of the U.S. Treasury. Rebecca J. Wilkins, a tax policy expert with Citizens for Tax Justice, said the federal government loses an estimated $100 billion a year because of tax havens. http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/romney-parks-millions-offshore-tax-haven/story?id=15378566#.Txy996VSSa8 Those arent off shore accounts? They dont cost the taxpayers here anything?

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 6 [7]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875