Bad news, all

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Or McConnel is avoiding antagonizing Obama further by saying what he really thinks, that the president is an arrogant asshole without a clue.
That would be the truth, btw.

Are you ******* kidding me. Do you really believe McConnell gives one shit and two good goddamns if he "avoids antagonizing Obama further?"

If so, I have a bridge.

Thats why you get banned on other forums. An inability to show civility when its needed.

Some never learn

 

[Vel]

I would think that if we adopted Obama's plans, we'd be much better off than we are. He wanted to get rid of the Bush tax cuts but didn't have the votes to do it. So...we still have this incredible deficit.

You'd think the GOP would cop to the fact that the tax cuts haven't helped, they have hurt.

Solidly Democratic houses in Congress voted to extend the tax cuts. Obama signed the legislation.
So raising taxes in a recession is a good idea? Is this your final answer?

Raising taxes on the top 2 percent? You betcha. Since they, far and away, make most of the income in disproportionate amounts.

Democrats had the Whitehouse, the House and a super-majority in the Senate from January 2009 until January of 2011. If the taxes didn't get raised, then you only have Democrats to blame. Not as if Republicans could have stopped them.

 

[The Rabbi]

I would think that if we adopted Obama's plans, we'd be much better off than we are. He wanted to get rid of the Bush tax cuts but didn't have the votes to do it. So...we still have this incredible deficit.

You'd think the GOP would cop to the fact that the tax cuts haven't helped, they have hurt.

Solidly Democratic houses in Congress voted to extend the tax cuts. Obama signed the legislation.
So raising taxes in a recession is a good idea? Is this your final answer?

Raising taxes on the top 2 percent? You betcha. Since they, far and away, make most of the income in disproportionate amounts.

The top 2% also account for like 60% of the take from income taxes. So if they cut their productivity in half you'll see tax revenues decline monumentally.
Are you this stupid in real life? Or is it just class hatred?

 

[candycorn]

Solidly Democratic houses in Congress voted to extend the tax cuts. Obama signed the legislation.
So raising taxes in a recession is a good idea? Is this your final answer?

Raising taxes on the top 2 percent? You betcha. Since they, far and away, make most of the income in disproportionate amounts.

The top 2% also account for like 60% of the take from income taxes. So if they cut their productivity in half you'll see tax revenues decline monumentally.
Are you this stupid in real life? Or is it just class hatred?

You're assuming productivity where none may exist; you're also making an assumption about it being "cut their productivity in half". Laughable as always, thanks for the giggle.

 

[candycorn]

Solidly Democratic houses in Congress voted to extend the tax cuts. Obama signed the legislation.
So raising taxes in a recession is a good idea? Is this your final answer?

Raising taxes on the top 2 percent? You betcha. Since they, far and away, make most of the income in disproportionate amounts.

Democrats had the Whitehouse, the House and a super-majority in the Senate from January 2009 until January of 2011. If the taxes didn't get raised, then you only have Democrats to blame. Not as if Republicans could have stopped them.

First we're talking about letting tax cuts (passed during a war) expire.

Secondly, Obama made a mistake with the healthcare being the centerpiece of his adventageous (sp?) Congress. The congressional democrats walked the plank on healthcare and they didn't focus on slaughtering Bush's sacred cows. And now he's paying the price with his poll numbers.

Good idea with Obamacare; politically probably not the best play.

 

[uscitizen]

Solidly Democratic houses in Congress voted to extend the tax cuts. Obama signed the legislation.
So raising taxes in a recession is a good idea? Is this your final answer?

Raising taxes on the top 2 percent? You betcha. Since they, far and away, make most of the income in disproportionate amounts.

Democrats had the Whitehouse, the House and a super-majority in the Senate from January 2009 until January of 2011. If the taxes didn't get raised, then you only have Democrats to blame. Not as if Republicans could have stopped them.

Baaaah Baaah!

 

[Avatar4321]

Sen. McConnell talks about debt, S&P, and Obama's intelligence

One of the audience members was also curious about his interaction with President Barack Obama during the last few days.

"What is he like behind closed doors?" asked Spencer Blue of Freedom Metal.

"The president is a really smart guy," was McConnell's response. "It's OK. We don't hate each other, we just have very different views on what the country should be."

Two different views, he says but one goal in mind, to get the country out of an economic crisis.

So - is McConnell a liar, or is the President a "really smart guy?"

Well let's break it down logically.

McConnell is a politicians
All politician's who open their mouth are liars
therefore McConnell is a liar

So logically, according to your question, the President is not a really smart guy.

Seriously though, I agree that this is a false dicotemy. McConnell may simply be mistaken. Which I think he is on this point.

 

[The Rabbi]

Raising taxes on the top 2 percent? You betcha. Since they, far and away, make most of the income in disproportionate amounts.

The top 2% also account for like 60% of the take from income taxes. So if they cut their productivity in half you'll see tax revenues decline monumentally.
Are you this stupid in real life? Or is it just class hatred?

You're assuming productivity where none may exist; you're also making an assumption about it being "cut their productivity in half". Laughable as always, thanks for the giggle.

People laugh at what they don't understand.
If they have no productivity, how are they making money? Or do you assume that high income people just lie around all day sipping bloody marys?
Seriously.

 

[candycorn]

The top 2% also account for like 60% of the take from income taxes. So if they cut their productivity in half you'll see tax revenues decline monumentally.
Are you this stupid in real life? Or is it just class hatred?

You're assuming productivity where none may exist; you're also making an assumption about it being "cut their productivity in half". Laughable as always, thanks for the giggle.

People laugh at what they don't understand.
If they have no productivity, how are they making money? Or do you assume that high income people just lie around all day sipping bloody marys?
Seriously.

If your taxes go up $30 on every $1,000 you make, you still have--what you're calling productivity--of $970. But in your mind, the $30 destroys the rich?

Seriously, you're a stupid assed ************.

 

[The Rabbi]

You're assuming productivity where none may exist; you're also making an assumption about it being "cut their productivity in half". Laughable as always, thanks for the giggle.

People laugh at what they don't understand.
If they have no productivity, how are they making money? Or do you assume that high income people just lie around all day sipping bloody marys?
Seriously.

If your taxes go up $30 on every $1,000 you make, you still have--what you're calling productivity--of $970. But in your mind, the $30 destroys the rich?

Seriously, you're a stupid assed ************.

So tax rates don't matter?
Are you really that dumb?

 

[candycorn]

People laugh at what they don't understand.
If they have no productivity, how are they making money? Or do you assume that high income people just lie around all day sipping bloody marys?
Seriously.

If your taxes go up $30 on every $1,000 you make, you still have--what you're calling productivity--of $970. But in your mind, the $30 destroys the rich?

Seriously, you're a stupid assed ************.

So tax rates don't matter?
Are you really that dumb?

Sure they matter dumbass....but your characterization that the $30 per $1000 made in income will somehow lead to no spending by the rich is a lie, flat out wrong, and further illustrates that you're incapable of independent thought.

 

[The Rabbi]

If your taxes go up $30 on every $1,000 you make, you still have--what you're calling productivity--of $970. But in your mind, the $30 destroys the rich?

Seriously, you're a stupid assed ************.

So tax rates don't matter?
Are you really that dumb?

Sure they matter dumbass....but your characterization that the $30 per $1000 made in income will somehow lead to no spending by the rich is a lie, flat out wrong, and further illustrates that you're incapable of independent thought.

Your characterization that an increase in taxes doesnt matter is contradicted by your statement that it does matter.
So which is it?


Because taxes do matter. And the high income earners are most affected by tax increases and have the biggest capacity to shield their income from them. That means they will respond quickly and lower their productivity, reducing tax revenue, not to mention economic activity.

 

[Douger]

Sen. McConnell talks about debt, S&P, and Obama's intelligence

One of the audience members was also curious about his interaction with President Barack Obama during the last few days.

"What is he like behind closed doors?" asked Spencer Blue of Freedom Metal.

"The president is a really smart guy," was McConnell's response. "It's OK. We don't hate each other, we just have very different views on what the country should be."

Two different views, he says but one goal in mind, to get the country out of an economic crisis.

So - is McConnell a liar, or is the President a "really smart guy?"

Oh, I don't doubt Obama is a bright guy.

That isn't the point.

My problem with him is that his life experiences has not lead him to the point where he could do his job effectively.

1) He never served in the military.
2) He never ran a business, had to resolve an employee dispute, or meet a payroll.
3) Served in the Illinois Senate, where he was such a non-entity few people outside his district even heard of him before 2004. Apparently voted 'Present' a lot.
4) Served in the US Senate for four years, not even a complete term, half of which he was running for president.

So, yeah, he might have a lot of book knowledge, but there's no substitute for real experience.

BULLSHIT. This idiot had to get Kennedy to rent him a gar when he came to DC for a " meeting" because he had no credit to rent one.
YOU assholes voted for him ( supposedly)

 

[BoycottTheday]

You cant make any money soaking the rich, the real money is from screwing the middle class.

The rich are in charge if no one noticed, they write the rules, not the middle class.

Just look at the riots in England, the shop keepers were "the rich" for the brain addled liberal offspring from hell.

Did anyone see any rich getting mugged? Nope, they were all on 'Oliday in Corsica.

This "tax the rich" mahantra" is just a cover to tax the middle class into oblivion.

 

[Claudette]

I think Barry's a smart guy.

He just doesn't have the experience it takes to run the country.

He's never run a business, had to meet a payroll and he just hasn't got a clue on how the keep the engine that runs the economy moving.