3 stupid myths republicans believe

[Listening]

Why'd you lie?

You first.

I have reached a point where I feel safe enough to make predictions.

I'm actually putting myself on the line with my points.

I'm still leaving a little bit of room to be wrong, but as you can see from the facts and analysis I'm presenting, it's not made up and it's based on reality.

I haven't seen a sensible USMB RW counter to date.

So let's bet.

If Obama wins...I leave the board.

If Romney wins....you do.

What say you ?

Your turn.

That answers how you lied ?

 

[candycorn]

1) Tax cuts pay for themselves.

Wrong. Every dollar lost in revenue is one more dollar the government needs to borrow to pay their bills. It's so obnoxious when repubs complain of gov spending yet are too ignorant to realize tax cutting leads to more borrowing. You think over spending is the only reason for our debt? No, it is also because of Bush's tax cuts.

2) Liberals are socialists/communists

Also wrong. We are talking about fundamental definitions of words here. Saying liberals are socialists is just as stupid as saying conservatives are liberals.

3) The wealthy are not too wealthy.

95% of income gains have gone to the top 5% of earners despite the fact that the lower classes are responsible for most of the productivity. In fact, productivity has grown exponentially in the lower classes since the 30s yet wages have remained flat.

By 2003, Mr. Bush grasped this lesson.
In that year, he cut the dividend and capital gains rates to 15 percent each, and the economy responded.
In two years, stocks rose 20 percent.
In three years, $15 trillion of new wealth was created.
The U.S. economy added 8 million new jobs from mid-2003 to early 2007, and the median household increased its wealth by $20,000 in real terms.

But the real jolt for tax-cutting opponents was that the 03 Bush tax cuts also generated a massive increase in federal tax receipts.
From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenues increased by $785 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. According to the Treasury Department, individual and corporate income tax receipts were up 40 percent in the three years following the Bush tax cuts. And (bonus) the rich paid an even higher percentage of the total tax burden than they had at any time in at least the previous 40 years. This was news to theNew York Times, whose astonished editorial board could only describe the gains as a “surprise windfall.”

DWYER: Bush tax cuts boosted federal revenue - Washington Times

Now for the substantiation...
Historical Tables | The White House

2004-2007...
I love the way Conservatives won't state one year at a time.
Of course people were being hired in 2006-2007; under FALSE pretenses created by a HOUSING BUBBLE!

Myths is a specialist in this sort of thing.

Everyone knows that the CIA cooked the intel going into Iraq; so much Colin Powell--the sitting Secretary of State--basically had it out with his intel officers prior to his UN Testimony. Asreported in the Guardian (the current Conservative paper of favor)

Powell's doubts over CIA intelligence on Iraq prompted him to set up secret review | World news | The Guardian

Yet whenever Iraq is brought up, Myths is quick to cite the Democrats without Powell's access (they were outside the administration) believed the CIA's reports about Iraq's WMDs. Basically Bush made the CIA a propaganda arm of his administration.

 

[candycorn]

You first.

So let's bet.

If Obama wins...I leave the board.

If Romney wins....you do.

What say you ?

Your turn.

That answers how you lied ?

Yes..you're still here. Obviously you haven't left.

 

[whitehall]

1) Tax cuts pay for themselves.

Wrong. Every dollar lost in revenue is one more dollar the government needs to borrow to pay their bills. It's so obnoxious when repubs complain of gov spending yet are too ignorant to realize tax cutting leads to more borrowing. You think over spending is the only reason for our debt? No, it is also because of Bush's tax cuts.

2) Liberals are socialists/communists

Also wrong. We are talking about fundamental definitions of words here. Saying liberals are socialists is just as stupid as saying conservatives are liberals.

3) The wealthy are not too wealthy.

95% of income gains have gone to the top 5% of earners despite the fact that the lower classes are responsible for most of the productivity. In fact, productivity has grown exponentially in the lower classes since the 30s yet wages have remained flat.

"Every dollar (how did you put it?) lost in revenue? WTF kind of reasoning is that? I guess the assumption is that all freaking revenue belongs to the government in the first place. Of course tax breaks work. They work better than the bribery known as "stimulus" because the people get to keep the money they earn instead of having it filtered through the government and used to pay off political supporters.

 

[Indeependent]

Your turn.

That answers how you lied ?

Yes..you're still here. Obviously you haven't left.

If he left he would be a leftist.

 

[Stephanie]

talk about brainwashed take this thread as an example

 

[Indeependent]

talk about brainwashed take this thread as an example

You realize that's the most comprehensive thing you've posted since I joined.

 

[Stephanie]

talk about brainwashed take this thread as an example

You realize that's the most comprehensive thing you've posted since I joined.

look in mirror dummy with that post

 

[Indeependent]

talk about brainwashed take this thread as an example

You realize that's the most comprehensive thing you've posted since I joined.

look in mirror dummy with that post

Shucks! Only one comprehensive posts in a row!
What could have been...

 

[Wry Catcher]

about one million more Americans were working in the Bush years then are working now.

true story

pretty comical; a left-wing idiot whining that the Bush tax cuts didn't create many jobs.
what did we get for the almost $1 trillion Obama Stimulus? do any of those jobs still exist?

be honest with your self leftard; do they still exist?

You've proved two things in the posts above: 1) You have been totally brainwashed by the conservative media; and, 2) you are uneducated and simply parrot what it is you heard from the conservative media.

Calling others stupid isn't a winning strategy, and it makes you appear to be what you call others. Provide evidence probative to prove cutting taxes benefits the many and not the few.

Years ago a Republican Governor in CA returned a small amount of money to all of us who paid state income tax. We all received $38.00 from Gov. Wilson. Money which could have been spent to increase our water storage something that would have paid dividends in this drought year.

Wilson was being a demagogue, not fiscally conservative. A fiscal conservative puts the roof in repair before it collapses and destroys the house. Why so many of you buy the propaganda of the GOP is scary.

You klnow, if you want to refute something someone writes, you need to provide some kind of argument, fact, or link. Merely telling him he's brainwashed just isnt very persuasive.
But you do this because you are a low information assholecocksucker incapable of such higher level functioning. I've never seen you substantiate or argue any point. You immediately label someone brainwashed, right wing mouthpiece or some other crap. Its because you have inferior intelligence, is what I guess.

Rabbi, please keep in mind that I know you're a liar, one of the dumber members on this forum and a partisan hack whose too many posts usually contain homophobic and vulgar sexual comments. All of which make you one very sick puppy.

That truth said, I have on this thread posted substantive comments in response to the numerous posts by those brainwashed individuals who like you represent the idiot fringe. All you and they ever posted are personal attacks (as noted yours are almost always sexual and vulgar) in response to any comment posted by others not supporting the dogma and axioms the far right believes are absolute truths.

Nothing sagacious has ever been the product of your keyboard, and you have never ever posted anything panoptic. Gibberish parroting of right wing propaganda is what you believe to be substantive and that is very sad.

 

[Faun]

Why'd you lie?

You first.

I have reached a point where I feel safe enough to make predictions.

I'm actually putting myself on the line with my points.

I'm still leaving a little bit of room to be wrong, but as you can see from the facts and analysis I'm presenting, it's not made up and it's based on reality.

I haven't seen a sensible USMB RW counter to date.

So let's bet.

If Obama wins...I leave the board.

If Romney wins....you do.

What say you ?

Your turn.

Great. Another rightie who lost that bet but then welched.

 

[Antares]

By 2003, Mr. Bush grasped this lesson.
In that year, he cut the dividend and capital gains rates to 15 percent each, and the economy responded.
In two years, stocks rose 20 percent.
In three years, $15 trillion of new wealth was created.
The U.S. economy added 8 million new jobs from mid-2003 to early 2007, and the median household increased its wealth by $20,000 in real terms.

But the real jolt for tax-cutting opponents was that the 03 Bush tax cuts also generated a massive increase in federal tax receipts.
From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenues increased by $785 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. According to the Treasury Department, individual and corporate income tax receipts were up 40 percent in the three years following the Bush tax cuts. And (bonus) the rich paid an even higher percentage of the total tax burden than they had at any time in at least the previous 40 years. This was news to theNew York Times, whose astonished editorial board could only describe the gains as a “surprise windfall.”

DWYER: Bush tax cuts boosted federal revenue - Washington Times

Now for the substantiation...
Historical Tables | The White House

2004-2007...
I love the way Conservatives won't state one year at a time.
Of course people were being hired in 2006-2007; under FALSE pretenses created by a HOUSING BUBBLE!

Myths is a specialist in this sort of thing.

Everyone knows that the CIA cooked the intel going into Iraq; so much Colin Powell--the sitting Secretary of State--basically had it out with his intel officers prior to his UN Testimony. Asreported in the Guardian (the current Conservative paper of favor)

Powell's doubts over CIA intelligence on Iraq prompted him to set up secret review | World news | The Guardian

Yet whenever Iraq is brought up, Myths is quick to cite the Democrats without Powell's access (they were outside the administration) believed the CIA's reports about Iraq's WMDs. Basically Bush made the CIA a propaganda arm of his administration.

Horse shit, I have DEM quotes including the Clinton's as far back as 93 saying Saddam had them, quit lying.

 

[Jarhead]

You've proved two things in the posts above: 1) You have been totally brainwashed by the conservative media; and, 2) you are uneducated and simply parrot what it is you heard from the conservative media.

Calling others stupid isn't a winning strategy, and it makes you appear to be what you call others. Provide evidence probative to prove cutting taxes benefits the many and not the few.

Years ago a Republican Governor in CA returned a small amount of money to all of us who paid state income tax. We all received $38.00 from Gov. Wilson. Money which could have been spent to increase our water storage something that would have paid dividends in this drought year.

Wilson was being a demagogue, not fiscally conservative. A fiscal conservative puts the roof in repair before it collapses and destroys the house. Why so many of you buy the propaganda of the GOP is scary.

You klnow, if you want to refute something someone writes, you need to provide some kind of argument, fact, or link. Merely telling him he's brainwashed just isnt very persuasive.
But you do this because you are a low information assholecocksucker incapable of such higher level functioning. I've never seen you substantiate or argue any point. You immediately label someone brainwashed, right wing mouthpiece or some other crap. Its because you have inferior intelligence, is what I guess.

Rabbi, please keep in mind that I know you're a liar, one of the dumber members on this forum and a partisan hack whose too many posts usually contain homophobic and vulgar sexual comments. All of which make you one very sick puppy.

That truth said, I have on this thread posted substantive comments in response to the numerous posts by those brainwashed individuals who like you represent the idiot fringe. All you and they ever posted are personal attacks (as noted yours are almost always sexual and vulgar) in response to any comment posted by others not supporting the dogma and axioms the far right believes are absolute truths.

Nothing sagacious has ever been the product of your keyboard, and you have never ever posted anything panoptic. Gibberish parroting of right wing propaganda is what you believe to be substantive and that is very sad.

Seeing as both the right and the left have reason to believe what they believe, I suggest you recognize that your post is somewhat hypocritical.

For every left initiative, I can show you why I believe it is wrong as you can show me why you believe it is right and for every right initiative, you will be able to show me why you believe I am wrong while I can show you why I believe I am right.

It is the spin and the hyperbole that ruins good debates.

And, of course, those that think they are 100% right and anyone who disagrees is an idiot.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The financial crisis happened under Bush's watch. We lost 2.3 million jobs in his last few months. Millions more were lost until the The Recovery Act was implemented. Altogether, the stimulus created or saved 2.5 million jobs. Had it been bigger like it was meant to be, we would be out of this mess.

Ok, a credible non partisan source would be nice.
BTW, only 10% of the Stimulus actually went to the private sector.
The other went to unionized public employees. Few of which still have their jobs.
One trillion dollars in money we did not have all gone with no appreciable positive results.
The stimulus was a failure.

You did not like paying less payroll tax?

Read more carefully next time. I was referring to the stimulus.
That one trillion dollar payoff to unionized public workers who gave Obama their undying support.

 

[thereisnospoon]

There is absolutely NO economic study supporting that tax cuts ALWAYS create more growth than simply deficit spending, let alone that they ALWAYS pay for themselves. Repeating bs like this, doesn't help conservatism.

Always?
The fact is when government removes capital from the private sector, the result is lowered revenues for government and weaker economy.
The other fact is in the history of modern civilization, no society has ever been able to tax itself into prosperity.

 

[candycorn]

2004-2007...
I love the way Conservatives won't state one year at a time.
Of course people were being hired in 2006-2007; under FALSE pretenses created by a HOUSING BUBBLE!

Myths is a specialist in this sort of thing.

Everyone knows that the CIA cooked the intel going into Iraq; so much Colin Powell--the sitting Secretary of State--basically had it out with his intel officers prior to his UN Testimony. Asreported in the Guardian (the current Conservative paper of favor)

Powell's doubts over CIA intelligence on Iraq prompted him to set up secret review | World news | The Guardian

Yet whenever Iraq is brought up, Myths is quick to cite the Democrats without Powell's access (they were outside the administration) believed the CIA's reports about Iraq's WMDs. Basically Bush made the CIA a propaganda arm of his administration.

Horse shit, I have DEM quotes including the Clinton's as far back as 93 saying Saddam had them, quit lying.

Yes, and you're 100% correct about that.

At that point it becomes a matter of threat assessment however. Through the lens of history we know that Clinton had the 1993 bombing of the WTC and Bush had the attack on WTC in 2001. (Neither one carried out by Saddam) Clinton looked at the intel and decided it was no threat and Bush looked at it and decided it was time to go to war. It turns out Clinton was right in the early 1990's about the threat Saddam posed to the US.

In the interest of fairness, Saddam attacking Israel would have put the US into a no-win situation--MAYBE. There is a 50/50 chance that the OPEC nations would have sided with us as they did in Desert Storm but there is equal chance that they would have looked at it as a blessing from Allah or whatever. Since we received no real interference from OPEC in Operation Iraqi Freedom, it's more likely that they would have backed us but you never really know.

If you want to use the Dem quotes from pre 2000 great but knowing the CIA cooked the intel it was feeding Congress then blaming Congress for it's belief that the CIA was an honest broker is why his name is now officially Myths.

 

[candycorn]

You first.

So let's bet.

If Obama wins...I leave the board.

If Romney wins....you do.

What say you ?

Your turn.

Great. Another rightie who lost that bet but then welched.

They are the party of personal responsibility until they are the persons who are held responsible...then it becomes a totally different ballgame.

What gets me is that the only thing risked was posting on a message board. If the stakes were astronomically higher such as $5 (LOL), I could see where they would welch and rationalize. But the stakes here was not doing something....

I find it really easy to "not" do something... I guess I'm just strong that way.

 

[Jarhead]

Your turn.

Great. Another rightie who lost that bet but then welched.

They are the party of personal responsibility until they are the persons who are held responsible...then it becomes a totally different ballgame.

What gets me is that the only thing risked was posting on a message board. If the stakes were astronomically higher such as $5 (LOL), I could see where they would welch and rationalize. But the stakes here was not doing something....

I find it really easy to "not" do something... I guess I'm just strong that way.

they?

When you decide to post like an adult, let me know. (like you used to do)

 

[Oldstyle]

Romney was a specialist in offshoring companies to red china which is a communist country. This has made commie china wealthy enough to build up their military to be a threat to the USA in the not too distant future. Anybody that voted for Romney is a supporter of a communist regime. and therefore a communist themselves.

Michael Immelt...Barack Obama's "Jobs Czar" sent FAR more jobs to China as the CEO of General Electric than Mitt Romney ever came CLOSE to doing and he did so as GE paid little or nothing if Federal taxes.

But that doesn't fit the "progressive narrative" about who Romney and Obama were...does it, Jason? So instead of a man who had the expertise to fix our reeling economy...we got another four years of someone who doesn't have a clue about economics or the creation of jobs. Is it any wonder the economy is still limping along five years after this guy took office? He's Jimmy Carter with darker pigment.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I will ask once again; do the Stimulus jobs still exist?

stimulus wasn't meant to be endless you LWNJs.

GOD what morons!
you don't believe in our system; you believe in welfare and food stamps and making people dependent on the government; and it shows; because that is exactly what we got right now

why do you fools on the Left act surprised we have record levels of what you believe in?

You seem to believe you know what others believe, and yet offer nothing as proof but your opinion, seemingly formed out of the air (AM Radio or Fox News).

BTW, the stimulus provided jobs and will continue to provide jobs well into the next century (unless the neo cons start a nuclear war). Highways 4, 80, and 24 are only three of several Bay Area Freeways which provide conveyance of goods and services to 8.5 million residents. Included in the stimulus were three major tunnel projects, a new section of the Bay Bridge (over a quarter of a million cars per day) and hundreds of interchanges, exits and entrances reconfigured to make them safer and more efficient.

A new subway system in SF as well as an extension of muni light rail to the SE section of The City and throughout SF huge building projects to the south of Downtown including UCSF (see links below) partially funded by the American recovery and reinvestment act and revenue sharing.

https://www.ucsf.edu/locations/mission-bay/mission-bay-campus

and,

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2012/07/1...ion-bay-lands-10-million-transportation-grant

Well how about that?
And who are the senators from California? And who is the US House member representing San Francisco? And how many unions were the happy recipients of MY money?
How come I get to pay for YOUR conveniences?
That project should have been funded by the people of the State of California.
No, the federal government should NOT be involved in funding ANY roadway project that does not include a part of the Interstate Highway System.
States are free to fund their own projects by erecting toll plazas. Preferably ones that need no people to collect money. All electronic.