Reject Reject Reject

[Common Sense]

why is McConnell all up in arms:

“It’s completely inappropriate; I’m vigorously in opposition to it,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who then had to admit the bill included earmarks for projects in his home state of Kentucky. Indeed, the spending levels are specifically designed to meet appropriations targets that McConnell and much of the Republican leadership espoused only months ago
Read more: Democrats' budget bill: $1.1 trillion; 1,900 pages - David Rogers - POLITICO.com

hmmm McConnell added earmarks and is rejecting the appropriations targets that he set, and then opposed the bill? is that political double speak i hear again?

 

[Common Sense]

Unsurprisingly, Common Nonsense has no idea what is being discussed.

why are there two conversations going on here? one about tax cuts and one about spending then?

or are you illiterate?

 

[Two Thumbs]

When you look at it in the context that they FOUGHT to give millionaires tax breaks, it seems extremely hypocritical.

So you are twisting this up so that it looks like a bad thing.

Do you actually want increased spending? Keeping in mind that the 2 spending bills, failed miserably, no matter how you count saved jobs.

Of course not, I want responsible spending. Which is why I have a hard time understanding how the right is throwing a hissy fit over this money when they had the nerve to actually fight to add to the deficit by giving tax breaks to millionaires. It just doesn't make sense.

Sure it does.

It's going to force the government to make further cuts, and to spend the money they do have to improve the economy so that people with money can hire people to work and grow whatever business they may run.

will every rich person go out and spend money to grow thier busness? no, some will just by another car.

but if you take that money from them, they have less to work with, and thus further stall the economy, while putting money in the hands of the very people that fucked the economy in the ass raw dowg style.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Unsurprisingly, Common Nonsense has no idea what is being discussed.

Actually that was an easy mistake.

and the vote was 89-19

How the hell that happend to CNN, I'll never know.

 

[Common Sense]

So you are twisting this up so that it looks like a bad thing.

Do you actually want increased spending? Keeping in mind that the 2 spending bills, failed miserably, no matter how you count saved jobs.

Of course not, I want responsible spending. Which is why I have a hard time understanding how the right is throwing a hissy fit over this money when they had the nerve to actually fight to add to the deficit by giving tax breaks to millionaires. It just doesn't make sense.

Sure it does.

It's going to force the government to make further cuts, and to spend the money they do have to improve the economy so that people with money can hire people to work and grow whatever business they may run.

will every rich person go out and spend money to grow thier busness? no, some will just by another car.

but if you take that money from them, they have less to work with, and thus further stall the economy, while putting money in the hands of the very people that fucked the economy in the ass raw dowg style.

the majority of people who own a small business arent rich or wealthy:

PayScale - Owner / Operator, Small Business Salary, Average Salaries

 

[Two Thumbs]

why is McConnell all up in arms:

“It’s completely inappropriate; I’m vigorously in opposition to it,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who then had to admit the bill included earmarks for projects in his home state of Kentucky. Indeed, the spending levels are specifically designed to meet appropriations targets that McConnell and much of the Republican leadership espoused only months ago
Read more: Democrats' budget bill: $1.1 trillion; 1,900 pages - David Rogers - POLITICO.com

hmmm McConnell added earmarks and is rejecting the appropriations targets that he set, and then opposed the bill? is that political double speak i hear again?

hahah

He was for them before he was for being against them.

pfft

As long as this crap doesn't pass, as is, I'm good. It would be sweet to see if they actually closed down the Fed

 

[RDD_1210]

Again, Big Government Sophistry.

When tax rates increase, regardless of the legislative gamesmanship, the result is an increase.

Extending the same rates is not a cut. The tax rates stay flat.

If the rates were lowered from this year, that would be a tax cut.

It's the difference between understanding the Real World and buying into the Orwellian Smoke & Mirrors you use to justify government expansion.

Thanks for avoiding my question. I'll chalk that up to not understanding (probable) or stubborn refusal to admit when you're wrong (actually also very probable).

I'm done trying to explain what should be a simple concept to simple minded people.

You're question doesn't deserve a response. It presupposed acceptance of the legislative blackmail used for the original cuts. It also presupposes that the tax cuts would just be allowed to lapse, which has never been the case.

LOL, did I ask anything about blackmail or how the cuts originally came to be? No. I asked a simple question that you refuse to answer.

What are the tax bills being debated now suppose to do to the Scheduled 2011 tax rates....

A) Raise the scheduled 2011 rates
B) Lower the scheduled 2011 rates

It's a simple question really.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Of course not, I want responsible spending. Which is why I have a hard time understanding how the right is throwing a hissy fit over this money when they had the nerve to actually fight to add to the deficit by giving tax breaks to millionaires. It just doesn't make sense.

Sure it does.

It's going to force the government to make further cuts, and to spend the money they do have to improve the economy so that people with money can hire people to work and grow whatever business they may run.

will every rich person go out and spend money to grow thier busness? no, some will just by another car.

but if you take that money from them, they have less to work with, and thus further stall the economy, while putting money in the hands of the very people that fucked the economy in the ass raw dowg style.

the majority of people who own a small business arent rich or wealthy:

PayScale - Owner / Operator, Small Business Salary, Average Salaries

That's not a valid reason to raise taxes on just the wealthy. There is no good reason to take money away from any citizen especially now. We need money in all our pockets.

 

[boedicca]

Thanks for avoiding my question. I'll chalk that up to not understanding (probable) or stubborn refusal to admit when you're wrong (actually also very probable).

I'm done trying to explain what should be a simple concept to simple minded people.

You're question doesn't deserve a response. It presupposed acceptance of the legislative blackmail used for the original cuts. It also presupposes that the tax cuts would just be allowed to lapse, which has never been the case.

LOL, did I ask anything about blackmail or how the cuts originally came to be? No. I asked a simple question that you refuse to answer.

What are the tax bills being debated now suppose to do to the Scheduled 2011 tax rates....

A) Raise the scheduled 2011 rates
B) Lower the scheduled 2011 rates

It's a simple question really.

No, it's not a simple question. It's a misleading one that serves your Big Brother Masters.

 

[Two Thumbs]

boedicca > < RDD

TwoThumbs >

 

[shintao]

I really hope they stick by their guns this time..

As do I....shut down government again....it's only a bad thing, this government stuff.

"Government is like a football game, you always have to know where the pigskins at." Shintao

 

[RDD_1210]

You're question doesn't deserve a response. It presupposed acceptance of the legislative blackmail used for the original cuts. It also presupposes that the tax cuts would just be allowed to lapse, which has never been the case.

LOL, did I ask anything about blackmail or how the cuts originally came to be? No. I asked a simple question that you refuse to answer.

What are the tax bills being debated now suppose to do to the Scheduled 2011 tax rates....

A) Raise the scheduled 2011 rates
B) Lower the scheduled 2011 rates

It's a simple question really.

No, it's not a simple question. It's a misleading one that serves your Big Brother Masters.

LOL. Nothing misleading about it. You're just a stubborn, uneducated hack who isn't open to intelligent discussion. Pathetic. And thanks for proving my point.

 

[boedicca]

Unsurprisingly, Common Nonsense has no idea what is being discussed.

why are there two conversations going on here? one about tax cuts and one about spending then?

or are you illiterate?

Moron, I'm not the one who got confused and thought the Senate had passed the Omnibus bill by 89-19.

 

[boedicca]

LOL, did I ask anything about blackmail or how the cuts originally came to be? No. I asked a simple question that you refuse to answer.

What are the tax bills being debated now suppose to do to the Scheduled 2011 tax rates....

A) Raise the scheduled 2011 rates
B) Lower the scheduled 2011 rates

It's a simple question really.

No, it's not a simple question. It's a misleading one that serves your Big Brother Masters.

LOL. Nothing misleading about it. You're just a stubborn, uneducated hack who isn't open to intelligent discussion. Pathetic. And thanks for proving my point.

Your a disingenous hack apparatchik who tries to convince people that paying more in taxes is not a change.

 

[RDD_1210]

LOL, did I ask anything about blackmail or how the cuts originally came to be? No. I asked a simple question that you refuse to answer.

What are the tax bills being debated now suppose to do to the Scheduled 2011 tax rates....

A) Raise the scheduled 2011 rates
B) Lower the scheduled 2011 rates

It's a simple question really.

No, it's not a simple question. It's a misleading one that serves your Big Brother Masters.

LOL. Nothing misleading about it. You're just a stubborn, uneducated hack who isn't open to intelligent discussion. Pathetic. And thanks for proving my point.

And NOW you neg rep me. The true sign of being utterly defeated. Nothing else to do...let's neg rep. Bwahahahahaahahah!!!

 

[boedicca]

The Whinger has Whinged.

My work here is done.

 

[RDD_1210]

The Whinger has Whinged.

My work here is done.

It would be the closest thing you've had to a job in ages. Glad I could help.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Children!

Do I need to take off my belt?

 

[Common Sense]

Unsurprisingly, Common Nonsense has no idea what is being discussed.

why are there two conversations going on here? one about tax cuts and one about spending then?

or are you illiterate?

Moron, I'm not the one who got confused and thought the Senate had passed the Omnibus bill by 89-19.

retard, like youve never had a typo on here before. i even admitted and corrected it. now

 

[bodecea]

children!

Do i need to take off my belt?

flasher!!!!!!