Paul Ryan On Taxes

[Vel]

Good video that explains things so simply even USMB liberals can understand.
********************************************************

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpxIr-lkQec&feature=player_embedded]Paul Ryan: Why Raising Taxes Hurts Job Creation - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Sherry]

Get government under control...well now that's just crazy talk.

 

[tererun]

Yeah, we all know the rill. Steal from the poor and give to the rich. One would think that you would have liked the stimulus had it not been finished up by Obama like everything else GWB started.

 

[Publius1787]

Good video that explains things so simply even USMB liberals can understand.
********************************************************

Paul Ryan: Why Raising Taxes Hurts Job Creation - YouTube

But Obama told me that higher corporate taxes and taxes on the wealthy is good for our economy. Who do I beleive?

 

[Vel]

Yeah, we all know the rill. Steal from the poor and give to the rich. One would think that you would have liked the stimulus had it not been finished up by Obama like everything else GWB started.

Ok fine. So it was still too complicated for SOME USMB liberals to understand. You would probably do best to stick with playing with your My Little Ponies and let the adults worry about the budget.

 

[uscitizen]

Yeah but Ryan voted for the stimulus, TARP, the GM bailout, the pill bill, etc.
How does he expect to pay for those things?

 

[Charles_Main]

Yeah, we all know the rill. Steal from the poor and give to the rich. One would think that you would have liked the stimulus had it not been finished up by Obama like everything else GWB started.

Yeah sure that is what he said.

Hack

 

[Publius1787]

Yeah, we all know the rill. Steal from the poor and give to the rich. One would think that you would have liked the stimulus had it not been finished up by Obama like everything else GWB started.

Funny how liberals who ignored the constitution in order to create their welfare vision for America (see the switch in time that saved the nine The switch in time that saved nine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ), and thereby, also opened the legal flood gates for corporate welfare, are now complaining about corporate welfare. You want to blame someone? Blame liberals, blame progressives, blame FDR, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, and Barack Obama. Blame all those liberals who beleive in a constitution that majically changes without so much as an constitutional amendment ratified by the people. Blame all those who bankrupted the federal government with government goodies for the unproductive masses. But for heaven sake don't blame conservatives who beleive in limited constitutional government. Don't blame the conservative justices during FDR's era who took James Madison's advice on federalist no. 41 attempting to keep the flood gates shut. And for God sakes don't blame the founding framers of the Constitution who SPECIFICALLY voted down the enumerated powers of chartering banks, economic subsidies, education, and building roads at the Philidelphia Convention! Blame all those who found those powers and more in the Constitution Dispite Madison's insistence that they don't exist.

Federalist no. 41 by James Madison before the ratification of the US Constitution with respect to liberals favorite clause in the US Constitution:

Some, who have not denied the necessity of the power of taxation, have grounded a very fierce attack against the Constitution, on the language in which it is defined. It has been urged and echoed, that the power "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States," amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction.

Had no other enumeration or definition of the powers of the Congress been found in the Constitution, than the general expressions just cited, the authors of the objection might have had some color for it; though it would have been difficult to find a reason for so awkward a form of describing an authority to legislate in all possible cases. A power to destroy the freedom of the press, the trial by jury, or even to regulate the course of descents, or the forms of conveyances, must be very singularly expressed by the terms "to raise money for the general welfare."

But what color can the objection have, when a specification of the objects alluded to by these general terms immediately follows, and is not even separated by a longer pause than a semicolon? If the different parts of the same instrument ought to be so expounded, as to give meaning to every part which will bear it, shall one part of the same sentence be excluded altogether from a share in the meaning; and shall the more doubtful and indefinite terms be retained in their full extent, and the clear and precise expressions be denied any signification whatsoever? For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power? Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars. But the idea of an enumeration of particulars which neither explain nor qualify the general meaning, and can have no other effect than to confound and mislead, is an absurdity, which, as we are reduced to the dilemma of charging either on the authors of the objection or on the authors of the Constitution, we must take the liberty of supposing, had not its origin with the latter.

The objection here is the more extraordinary, as it appears that the language used by the convention is a copy from the articles of Confederation. The objects of the Union among the States, as described in article third, are "their common defense, security of their liberties, and mutual and general welfare." The terms of article eighth are still more identical: "All charges of war and all other expenses that shall be incurred for the common defense or general welfare, and allowed by the United States in Congress, shall be defrayed out of a common treasury," etc. A similar language again occurs in article ninth. Construe either of these articles by the rules which would justify the construction put on the new Constitution, and they vest in the existing Congress a power to legislate in all cases whatsoever. But what would have been thought of that assembly, if, attaching themselves to these general expressions, and disregarding the specifications which ascertain and limit their import, they had exercised an unlimited power of providing for the common defense and general welfare? I appeal to the objectors themselves, whether they would in that case have employed the same reasoning in justification of Congress as they now make use of against the convention. How difficult it is for error to escape its own condemnation!

 

[buckeye45_73]

Yeah, we all know the rill. Steal from the poor and give to the rich. One would think that you would have liked the stimulus had it not been finished up by Obama like everything else GWB started.

Wait, steal WHAT from the poor? You mean make them get off their asses and get a job instead of watching Judge Joe Brown all day?

 

[Black_Label]

It's pretty easy to understand. Jack up taxes on the poor while slashing them to the rich, the typical radical right wing "reverse robin hood" AKA give everything to the rich tactics.

 

[hortysir]

Yeah but Ryan voted for the stimulus, TARP, the GM bailout, the pill bill, etc.
How does he expect to pay for those things?

Not that one

 

[Black_Label]

Yeah, we all know the rill. Steal from the poor and give to the rich. One would think that you would have liked the stimulus had it not been finished up by Obama like everything else GWB started.

Wait, steal WHAT from the poor? You mean make them get off their asses and get a job instead of watching Judge Joe Brown all day?

If the lazy good for nothings got off their asses and got a job, fox news would likely go off the air from the ratings plunge.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Yeah, we all know the rill. Steal from the poor and give to the rich. One would think that you would have liked the stimulus had it not been finished up by Obama like everything else GWB started.

Wait, steal WHAT from the poor? You mean make them get off their asses and get a job instead of watching Judge Joe Brown all day?

If the lazy good for nothings got off their asses and got a job, fox news would likely go off the air from the ratings plunge.

So the poor folks like Fox? I thought they were democrats? And they STILL dont watch MSNBC or CNN at ALL. Sorry man, you liberals dont make consistant arguements, I told you, if you were good you would get a reacharound, so no reacharound for ya this time.