If tax cuts are what's needed...

[wihosa]

If as the RepubliCONs keep saying that all we need are more tax cuts in order to produce more jobs, why didn't the last ten years produce more jobs than we had under President Clinton?

Some how when the wealthy paid that astronomically high tax rate of 39.6% instead of the 35% we have now the economy produced more jobs.

I'm sure the righties will have some explanation and they'll give us links to all sorts of graphs and stats cooked up buy right wing "think tanks" that will prove that the obvious is not true. Some how they will convince us that if the wealthy pay a whole 4 1/2 % more it will KILL jobs.

Or maybe we will stop listening to the RepubliCONs and just look at the facts. The "conservative era" has led to massive debt and job loss, this is the record of the last thirty years.

The RepubliCONs think that President Obama should have in less than two years fixed the mess that they have created, but of course they have done all they could to prevent him from doing so.

They did the same to President Clinton but he managed after eight years of the same underhanded behavior by the RepubliCONs to bring our fiscal house into order. Then W did Reaganomics in spades and it just about drove the country into a second great depression.

Reaganomics, supply side economics, trickle down theory, voodoo economics is a failure, so perhaps it's time to realize that we were CONNED by the RepubliCONs.

 

[Oddball]

When will ANY leftist propose cutting spending and reducing bureaucracy, unrelated to military spending?

Not that I personally believe that military spending hasn't been and continues to be wasteful...Just that I'd like to hear JUST ONE other area where democrat spend-a-holic do-gooders would cut.

C'mon....Bring it.

 

[wihosa]

That's just silly, all you have to do is look at what Bill Clinton accomplished despite being hounded by the right wing jackels.

After inheriting the mess created by Reagan and Bush I he balanced the budget, the only President to do it in over fifty years.

Sorry pal, the 'borrow and spend-a-holics' are the RepubliCONs and you've be CONNED.

 

[Conspiracist]

If as the RepubliCONs keep saying that all we need are more tax cuts in order to produce more jobs, why didn't the last ten years produce more jobs than we had under President Clinton?

Some how when the wealthy paid that astronomically high tax rate of 39.6% instead of the 35% we have now the economy produced more jobs.

I'm sure the righties will have some explanation and they'll give us links to all sorts of graphs and stats cooked up buy right wing "think tanks" that will prove that the obvious is not true. Some how they will convince us that if the wealthy pay a whole 4 1/2 % more it will KILL jobs.

Or maybe we will stop listening to the RepubliCONs and just look at the facts. The "conservative era" has led to massive debt and job loss, this is the record of the last thirty years.

The RepubliCONs think that President Obama should have in less than two years fixed the mess that they have created, but of course they have done all they could to prevent him from doing so.

They did the same to President Clinton but he managed after eight years of the same underhanded behavior by the RepubliCONs to bring our fiscal house into order. Then W did Reaganomics in spades and it just about drove the country into a second great depression.

Reaganomics, supply side economics, trickle down theory, voodoo economics is a failure, so perhaps it's time to realize that we were CONNED by the RepubliCONs.

Did you kind of forget about that huge sucking sound we began hearing and were warned about? You know, the sound of our jobs going to China? That is why jobs were not produced, they were leaving faster than they could be created.

 

[Oddball]

That's just silly, all you have to do is look at what Bill Clinton accomplished despite being hounded by the right wing jackels.

After inheriting the mess created by Reagan and Bush I he balanced the budget, the only President to do it in over fifty years.

Sorry pal, the 'borrow and spend-a-holics' are the RepubliCONs and you've be CONNED.

Bullcookies.

First of all, congress passes budgets and the prez only signs off on them.

Secondly, the mythical "balanced budget" was projected out to 2002...It never existed in actual reality.

Tell the DNC to come up with some fresh yapping points, M'kay?

Now, come up with an answer...any answer...to #2.

 

[Big Fitz]

We need to leave taxes where they are for now. What we REALLY need is spending cuts. Across the board, every program, Federal/State/County/Local. Everyone. If that is done at once, you will see rapid improvement in our economic situation. Then freeze the budget there for 10 years. No new programs, no new taxes, no new subsidies, nothing. You fund what you got, and deal with the normal crisis that come about. Once the debt is fixed, THEN you look back and go what do we need, and what should be cut more.

If we would get back to constitutional roots, most of the governmental spending problems would go away.

 

[Big Fitz]

I think we also need to introduce new crime statutes for elected officials for economic crime and fraud. A little too much immunity for my tastes in the halls of power.

 

[Paulie]

The budget was balanced under Clinton because repubs had control of congress and that's the only time they're fiscally responsible...when they have a dem president to show up.

 

[wihosa]

Yeah, that's the ticket, the budget was balanced because of the RepubliCONs, yeah that's the ticket!

That's why when the RepubliCONs comtrolled the Congress and the Presidency there was a sea, no, an ocean of red ink.

Don't believe your own eyes, just keep listening to the RepubliCONs.

By the way Oddball, did you know that if the President doesn't agree with a spending bill he doesn't have to sign it? It's called a veto. It's in this thing called the Constitution, give it a read some time.

Second by the way, Bush never vetoed a single spending bill in eight years.

Yeah, President Clinton balanced the budget because of the RepubliCONs, yeah, that's the ticket!

 

[Article 15]

Ah, yes, "RepubliCON" ... much like it's cousin "DemocRAT" it's a sure sign that the person writing the post is a total partisan hack.

 

[wihosa]

That's right Article, if you don't like the message, attack the messanger.

More right wing projection.

 

[Article 15]

That's right Article, if you don't like the message, attack the messanger.

More right wing projection.

Yup, I'm totallyyyyyyyyyyyyyy are right winger.

 

[wihosa]

I don't really know what you are, and don't really care but if you have a point to make regarding the original post why not make it?

As for the RepubliCON tag, I feel it's appropriate considering this con game they've been playing for thirty years where they pretend to be "fiscal conserfatives" while the national debt balloons under their "leadership".

Please don't come back with the same old, it's because of the Dems. At some point the RepubliCONs have to own their record.

 

[Article 15]

I don't really know what you are, and don't really care but if you have a point to make regarding the original post why not make it?

A point regarding the OP? I'll pass but thanks for the offer anyway.

As for the RepubliCON tag, I feel it's appropriate considering this con game they've been playing for thirty years where they pretend to be "fiscal conserfatives" while the national debt balloons under their "leadership".

That's good for you. It's also the sign of a hack. I wouldn't expect to get taken all that seriously posting like that. We have a couple of posters that do the whole "democRAT" thing and a liberal who writes out "con$ervative" and republican$ ... they get mocked regularly.

Please don't come back with the same old, it's because of the Dems. At some point the RepubliCONs have to own their record.

Not a problem. I don't think our current situation is the result of exclusively one party.

Good luck trying to get the right to own up to their own failures and short-comings. In my experience many are all about personal responsibility when it comes to others owning up to their failures but not their own.

 

[DiveCon]

That's right Article, if you don't like the message, attack the messanger.

More right wing projection.

Yup, I'm totallyyyyyyyyyyyyyy are right winger.

LOL i see you've met the rdean clone

 

[Big Fitz]

That's right Article, if you don't like the message, attack the messanger.

More right wing projection.

Yup, I'm totallyyyyyyyyyyyyyy are right winger.

LOL i see you've met the rdean clone

It sounds more like an Edthecretin sockpuppet. I hate to think they're breeding.

 

[DiveCon]

Yup, I'm totallyyyyyyyyyyyyyy are right winger.

LOL i see you've met the rdean clone

It sounds more like an Edthecretin sockpuppet. I hate to think they're breeding.

or that shaman moron, 6 of one, half a dozen of another

 

[California Girl]

That's right Article, if you don't like the message, attack the messanger.

More right wing projection.

Yup, I'm totallyyyyyyyyyyyyyy are right winger.

Yep. You Facist.

 

[California Girl]

I don't really know what you are, and don't really care but if you have a point to make regarding the original post why not make it?

As for the RepubliCON tag, I feel it's appropriate considering this con game they've been playing for thirty years where they pretend to be "fiscal conserfatives" while the national debt balloons under their "leadership".

Please don't come back with the same old, it's because of the Dems. At some point the RepubliCONs have to own their record.

Actually, the intelligent Americans recognize that it is the fault of our politicians - all of them. A pox on both their houses.

It's only the drooling hordes on both 'sides' who can't see it.... They're too busy blaming the other guy.

 

[Oddball]

Yeah, that's the ticket, the budget was balanced because of the RepubliCONs, yeah that's the ticket!

That's why when the RepubliCONs comtrolled the Congress and the Presidency there was a sea, no, an ocean of red ink.

Don't believe your own eyes, just keep listening to the RepubliCONs.

By the way Oddball, did you know that if the President doesn't agree with a spending bill he doesn't have to sign it? It's called a veto. It's in this thing called the Constitution, give it a read some time.

Second by the way, Bush never vetoed a single spending bill in eight years.

Yeah, President Clinton balanced the budget because of the RepubliCONs, yeah, that's the ticket!

We're not talking about George BOOOOOSH! here, deflectasaurus rex.

Moreover, there still was never a balanced budget.

Now, when has any democrat ever cut any spending that wasn't related to the military?