Schumer To Dems: I've Been "Instructed" To Call GOP "Extreme", caught on conf. call

[Article 15]

The cuts the GOP propose are extreme. Cutting meals on wheels for the elderly? All are cuts to the poor while giving tax cuts to the wealthiest and corporations.

Is Obama extreme? Because he gave the tax cut to the rich again this year. Not just the GOP.

Of course most "cuts" will be to the poor and elderly. The poor and old are the ones who get the most spent on them.

But, we're broke. What other choice we got?

There were no taxes cut. Stop perpetuating the liberal lie.

Before the "compromise" what were the 2011 income tax rates? What were they after?

 

[Avatar4321]

Is Obama extreme? Because he gave the tax cut to the rich again this year. Not just the GOP.

Of course most "cuts" will be to the poor and elderly. The poor and old are the ones who get the most spent on them.

But, we're broke. What other choice we got?

There were no taxes cut. Stop perpetuating the liberal lie.

Before the "compromise" what were the 2011 income tax rates? What were they after?

You don't cut taxes by not raising them. Keeping the status quo is not a cut.

Why aren't you guys ever honest about this? Why on earth do you want the American people to labor more than necessary for your government programs? Why do you insist that we spend money we don't have on programs that we don't need?

Is there just something that you fear about self government? Are you really that scared to take responsibility for your actions? Is winning the debate so much more important than the truth?

 

[Article 15]

There were no taxes cut. Stop perpetuating the liberal lie.

Before the "compromise" what were the 2011 income tax rates? What were they after?

You don't cut taxes by not raising them. Keeping the status quo is not a cut.

Why aren't you guys ever honest about this? Why on earth do you want the American people to labor more than necessary for your government programs? Why do you insist that we spend money we don't have on programs that we don't need?

Is there just something that you fear about self government? Are you really that scared to take responsibility for your actions? Is winning the debate so much more important than the truth?

Why aren't you honest about this?

I asked you two very straight forward questions and you are doing everything you can to avoid answering them. Probably because the answer kills your argument.

Here they are again:

What were the 2011 rates before the compromise? What were they after?

 

[Foxfyre]

Well gee, I logged in here because I thought it was an interesting topic. And in less than two pages, the lefties had managed to deflect from something a little embarrassing on their side and completely changed the subject.

That's how the leftist media does it too, by the way. Unless it is something that can make somebody on the right look bad and then they'll pile on for days.

It would be almost funny if it wasn't so pathetic.

 

[The Rabbi]

Political parties put out talking points. More at eleven.

Exactly.

Like Republicans haven't been instructed to label everything Obama supports, "socialism". Even if it's something they were fully behind just years ago. Like, say, the individual mandate.

Proof that's the case? Or are you just talking out of your ass?

 

[The Rabbi]

Before the "compromise" what were the 2011 income tax rates? What were they after?

You don't cut taxes by not raising them. Keeping the status quo is not a cut.

Why aren't you guys ever honest about this? Why on earth do you want the American people to labor more than necessary for your government programs? Why do you insist that we spend money we don't have on programs that we don't need?

Is there just something that you fear about self government? Are you really that scared to take responsibility for your actions? Is winning the debate so much more important than the truth?

Why aren't you honest about this?

I asked you two very straight forward questions and you are doing everything you can to avoid answering them. Probably because the answer kills your argument.

Here they are again:

What were the 2011 rates before the compromise? What were they after?

What were they before? Non-existent because they were changed in 2010. They could have been anything-higher, lower, the same. Rates were not changed in 2011, they were changed in 2010.
Thus no tax cut. Keeping things the same is not cutting anything.

Back to the OP: It is hardly a surprise that there is a central authority and marching orders. What will also not be a surprise is that the media is in the chain of command and repeats these talking points as well.

 

[Article 15]

The tax rates were set to sunset back to previous levels in 2011.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Before the "compromise" what were the 2011 income tax rates? What were they after?

You don't cut taxes by not raising them. Keeping the status quo is not a cut.

Why aren't you guys ever honest about this? Why on earth do you want the American people to labor more than necessary for your government programs? Why do you insist that we spend money we don't have on programs that we don't need?

Is there just something that you fear about self government? Are you really that scared to take responsibility for your actions? Is winning the debate so much more important than the truth?

Why aren't you honest about this?

I asked you two very straight forward questions and you are doing everything you can to avoid answering them. Probably because the answer kills your argument.

Here they are again:

What were the 2011 rates before the compromise? What were they after?

Before the 2011 Tax season there were no hard and fast tax rates. That is how our Government works, It is called democracy. How about YOU answer a question.... What cuts occurred between the 2010 rates and the 2011 rates?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The tax rates were set to sunset back to previous levels in 2011.

No they were not "set" at anything until the Congress convenes before the 2011 tax season. Once again what changed from 2010 to 2011 in the tax rates? Please provide us this magic tax cut you speak of.

 

[The Rabbi]

The tax rates were set to sunset back to previous levels in 2011.

No they were not "set" at anything until the Congress convenes before the 2011 tax season. Once again what changed from 2010 to 2011 in the tax rates? Please provide us this magic tax cut you speak of.

It is Libthink. They could have taken more. So the fact that they didnt constitutes a tax cut. It's like a mugger. He is generous because he could have put you in the hospital but instead settled on taking your watch.

 

[Article 15]

The tax rates were set to sunset back to previous levels in 2011.

No they were not "set" at anything until the Congress convenes before the 2011 tax season. Once again what changed from 2010 to 2011 in the tax rates? Please provide us this magic tax cut you speak of.

The BOOOOOOOOSH tax cuts were TEMPORARY and passed via reconciliation with a sunset clause. They were not intended to be permanent.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The tax rates were set to sunset back to previous levels in 2011.

No they were not "set" at anything until the Congress convenes before the 2011 tax season. Once again what changed from 2010 to 2011 in the tax rates? Please provide us this magic tax cut you speak of.

The BOOOOOOOOSH tax cuts were TEMPORARY and passed via reconciliation with a sunset clause. They were not intended to be permanent.

That is NOT how our Government works. Until Congress convenes they, not you, determine what the next years tax codes and rates will be. I REPEAT. You keep claiming there was a cut. SO provide for us the difference between 2010 and 2011 tax rates so we can see this "cut".

By the way? Every year during the past the "Bush" cuts could have been changed by any Congress with the approval of the President or a veto over his refusal to sign. That is the way it works.

 

[Article 15]

Funny, to me "temporary tax cut" means at the end of the time period they go back up.

 

[Avatar4321]

Funny, to me "temporary tax cut" means at the end of the time period they go back up.

That seems rather beside the point doesn't it?

They never went back up. So you can't say that maintaining the status quo is a tax cut. It isn't. It's refusing to raise taxes on people.

again, I dont know why being honest about it is so difficult.

 

[Seawytch]

Oh no!!! Shumer told Dems to tell the truth!

 

[Foxfyre]

No they were not "set" at anything until the Congress convenes before the 2011 tax season. Once again what changed from 2010 to 2011 in the tax rates? Please provide us this magic tax cut you speak of.

The BOOOOOOOOSH tax cuts were TEMPORARY and passed via reconciliation with a sunset clause. They were not intended to be permanent.

That is NOT how our Government works. Until Congress convenes they, not you, determine what the next years tax codes and rates will be. I REPEAT. You keep claiming there was a cut. SO provide for us the difference between 2010 and 2011 tax rates so we can see this "cut".

By the way? Every year during the past the "Bush" cuts could have been changed by any Congress with the approval of the President or a veto over his refusal to sign. That is the way it works.

The truth is it essentially was a temporary one-time reduction in a rate so that Obama could take credit for a 'tax cut'. And though I never mind the government allowing us to spend more of our own money as we choose, even temporarily, the effect of it was negligible to those receiving it and probably most never even noticed it happened.