Senate Votes to Side With the Middle Class, Gauntlet Thrown Down to House Repubs.

[Moonglow]

Bush also created a large class of non taxed people. Never heard any complaining about that till Obama.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

You mean the Bush tax cuts weren't only for the rich? Isn't that what we've been told for years now? How Bush was giving the rich some huge break?

Turns out everyone received them. Now its time ot preserve them for the middle class but make sure the rich get soaked.

You LOLberals cant even keep a fucking story straight.

Color. Me. Shocked.

Hey look at this! You shot out a bunch of bullshit and didn't even address the issue at hand! Good job!

Now, tell me again why House Republicans will punish EVERYONE for the sake of those who can afford to be taxed four more cents on their dollar. And then maybe I'll remind you (again) that no Lefty ever screamed about the part of the BTC that covered the middle class. We've always said it's disproportionately favorable to the rich, which is the big reason we don't like it. But then that response will also completely defuse your bitterly holding onto your belief of what Liberals think about the Bush Tax Cuts. So you won't like that either. Looks like Grrrvrrr Nrrrqrrrssstt has gotten EVERYONE's tits in the wringer. YAY!

A dollar is only worth four cents, you fucking numb skull.

 

[Pho_King]

Bush also created a large class of non taxed people. Never heard any complaining about that till Obama.

That's because the idea of cutting checks to black people that do next to nothing was not really considered until one of those chocolate faces was elected president. It's all about race.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Middle-Class Tax Cuts Preserved For A Year In Bill Passed By Senate

So the Senate killed the GOP plan, passed the Democrats' (which will extend cuts to over 90% of Americans ...probably more like 95-99%) plan. And now the House Republicans will be forced to show their cards. America will get to see them literally choose to punish EVERYONE to protect the 1%.

Good jerb, Grrvrrr Nrrqrrrst.

But, but... the Bush tax cuts are only for the wealthiest among us... WTF?

I see you don't actually understand the Democratic/Liberal argument on the BTC at all. And I'm shocked! SHOCKED I TELL YOU!

It's always been that the PORTION of the tax cuts that extend to the rich have been the most damaging. You fucktards just can't parse out a point to save your lives.

 

[hortysir]

Middle-Class Tax Cuts Preserved For A Year In Bill Passed By Senate

So the Senate killed the GOP plan, passed the Democrats' (which will extend cuts to over 90% of Americans ...probably more like 95-99%) plan. And now the House Republicans will be forced to show their cards. America will get to see them literally choose to punish EVERYONE to protect the 1%.

Good jerb, Grrvrrr Nrrqrrrst.

This post, and the "Thanks" underneath it proves how blind you guys are to how partisan our Congress has become without a strong leader to grab them by their collective ears.

They're getting no-fucking-where, people.

The House passes an identical Bill and the Senate refuses to touch it.

The Senate passes this bill and, from your linked article:

But it appeared unlikely that the House would embrace a similar measure before the election, having proposed its own bill to extend all the Bush-era cuts.

Fuck all these idiots.
Don't re-elect ANYone.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Raising tax rates will lead to increase revenue which will help lower the deficit.

You're welcome.

no it won't

Yes, it will.

Bush cut taxes three times over three years and in all three years revenue dropped. This proved we are on the left side of the Laffer Curve, and therefore any increase in tax rates will result in increased revenue.

Revenues were higher after all the tax cuts were implemented than they were before them. That would lead a thinking person to wonder if increasing taxes might result in a drop in revenue.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Bush also created a large class of non taxed people. Never heard any complaining about that till Obama.

That's because the idea of cutting checks to black people that do next to nothing was not really considered until one of those chocolate faces was elected president. It's all about race.

Was this really necessary?

 

[ConservaDerrps]

You mean the Bush tax cuts weren't only for the rich? Isn't that what we've been told for years now? How Bush was giving the rich some huge break?

Turns out everyone received them. Now its time ot preserve them for the middle class but make sure the rich get soaked.

You LOLberals cant even keep a fucking story straight.

Color. Me. Shocked.

Hey look at this! You shot out a bunch of bullshit and didn't even address the issue at hand! Good job!

Now, tell me again why House Republicans will punish EVERYONE for the sake of those who can afford to be taxed four more cents on their dollar. And then maybe I'll remind you (again) that no Lefty ever screamed about the part of the BTC that covered the middle class. We've always said it's disproportionately favorable to the rich, which is the big reason we don't like it. But then that response will also completely defuse your bitterly holding onto your belief of what Liberals think about the Bush Tax Cuts. So you won't like that either. Looks like Grrrvrrr Nrrrqrrrssstt has gotten EVERYONE's tits in the wringer. YAY!

A dollar is only worth four cents, you fucking numb skull.

Uhh. What?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Bush also created a large class of non taxed people. Never heard any complaining about that till Obama.

Should have paid more attention.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Bush also created a large class of non taxed people. Never heard any complaining about that till Obama.

That's because the idea of cutting checks to black people that do next to nothing was not really considered until one of those chocolate faces was elected president. It's all about race.

Was this really necessary?

For Racist Republicans, yes. For non-racist Republicans? No. But are you kind of seeing why it's REALLLY easy to assume every racist IS a Republican?

 

[Pho_King]

Bush also created a large class of non taxed people. Never heard any complaining about that till Obama.

That's because the idea of cutting checks to black people that do next to nothing was not really considered until one of those chocolate faces was elected president. It's all about race.

Was this really necessary?

Yes it was. Just because moonbeam could only hint at the racism that motivates people like you does not mean that other, stronger personalities should stay silent about your bigotry.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Bush also created a large class of non taxed people. Never heard any complaining about that till Obama.

That's because the idea of cutting checks to black people that do next to nothing was not really considered until one of those chocolate faces was elected president. It's all about race.

You're fucking disgusting piece of shit, and I hope you die before you procreate.

 

[Pho_King]

That's because the idea of cutting checks to black people that do next to nothing was not really considered until one of those chocolate faces was elected president. It's all about race.

Was this really necessary?

For Racist Republicans, yes. For non-racist Republicans? No. But are you kind of seeing why it's REALLLY easy to assume every racist IS a Republican?

Pay attention, soggy. This is exactly my point, summed up in its dipshittery perfectly by conservaderrrps, our resident dipshit.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Bush also created a large class of non taxed people. Never heard any complaining about that till Obama.

That's because the idea of cutting checks to black people that do next to nothing was not really considered until one of those chocolate faces was elected president. It's all about race.

You're fucking disgusting piece of shit, and I hope you die before you procreate.

There is that LOLberal tolerance we've come to expect. So tolerant and understanding, these LOLberals. Affecting change through compassion....

 

[Pho_King]

Bush also created a large class of non taxed people. Never heard any complaining about that till Obama.

That's because the idea of cutting checks to black people that do next to nothing was not really considered until one of those chocolate faces was elected president. It's all about race.

You're fucking disgusting piece of shit, and I hope you die before you procreate.

Fight on, brother!

 

[ConservaDerrps]

That's because the idea of cutting checks to black people that do next to nothing was not really considered until one of those chocolate faces was elected president. It's all about race.

You're fucking disgusting piece of shit, and I hope you die before you procreate.

There is that LOLberal tolerance we've come to expect. So tolerant and understanding, these LOLberals. Affecting change through compassion....

Tolerant of what? What do I have to be tolerant of? Intolerance? Yeah, see, it doesn't really work that way, fucko. You can have and are entitled to every racist, disgusting, homophobic form of bigotry you want. But I have the same right to call you a racist, disgusting, homophobic bigot.

Get with the program, Saggy Balls.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Was this really necessary?

For Racist Republicans, yes. For non-racist Republicans? No. But are you kind of seeing why it's REALLLY easy to assume every racist IS a Republican?

Pay attention, soggy. This is exactly my point, summed up in its dipshittery perfectly by conservaderrrps, our resident dipshit.

Oh, I see. You want to play the "ironic" racism card? How come I don't buy that?

Do you believe what you wrote?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

See what I mean? These are not liberals, they are LOLberals. Turds. Socialist/fascists. Etc.

 

[DontBeStupid]

no it won't

Yes, it will.

Bush cut taxes three times over three years and in all three years revenue dropped. This proved we are on the left side of the Laffer Curve, and therefore any increase in tax rates will result in increased revenue.

Revenues were higher after all the tax cuts were implemented than they were before them. That would lead a thinking person to wonder if increasing taxes might result in a drop in revenue.

100% false.

In 2003, revenue was lower than Clinton's last year.
In 2004, revenue was lower than Clinton's last year.
In 2005, revenue was $0.1T higher than Clinton's last year but as a share of GDP was lower than any year Clinton was in office.

In fact, since 2003, tax revenue, as share of GDP, has only twice been higher than Clinton's worst year, and has never come close to his average or his record high.

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

 

[ConservaDerrps]

See what I mean? These are not liberals, they are LOLberals. Turds. Socialist/fascists. Etc.

Do you have ANYTHING in your bag besides ad hominem? And before you "pot-kettle" me for it, you'll notice, you dimwitted fuckstick, that I rarely berate and belittle without some accompanying detail and legitimate basis of argument.

Oh, TakeASuckOnTheGlassDick, you're such a treat.