Why Perry cannot lose

[Dot Com]

He's just now starting to get scrutinized. Look at this, for example LOL:

Perry pushed bill that could boost doctor's firm - politics - Decision 2012 - msnbc.com

 

[The Rabbi]

idiotic point? You agreed with my point: Republicans are advocating reducing taxes on the wealthiest while getting rid of a tax cut for the middle class.

That is so distorted as to be a lie.
Republicans advocate keeping ALL tax rates from the Bush era intact and support repealing the deficit-increasing payroll tax cut that has failed to stimulate anything.

Why do you need to lie? Are you too stupid or brainwashed to understand the truth?

So, once again you take great pains to agree with me while attempting to sound as if you are disagreeing with me. Please, which of these statements do you find false:

1. Republicans favor maintaining the lower top marginal rate, set to expire next year.

2. Many of those same Republicans favor allowing the payroll tax cut to expire next year.

I know the payroll tax cut was a black man's idea, but still..you can admit you support a tax cut.

I know you're losing badly when you have to play the race card. Doubtless the payroll tax cut was Christine ROmer's idea.

You agree with me that
a) Republicans want to keep all tax rates at the Bush era level. That includes on lower income earners.
b) The payroll tax cut did nothing to spur the economy and has only contrbuted to the deficit.

Which one of those is false? Are proof?

 

[The Rabbi]

By the way
who said anything about blowing uo SS or Medicare?
Ryans bill would have allowed Medicare to go private from the nuts and bolts on a slide scale with Govt oversight

it would have changed the year I turn 65 and it does not scare me at all

Have there ever been success stories of government benefits or functions going private?

The big problem with privatization is usually the sudden realization that a profit motive doesn't always translate into providing the best services available. Government agencies have a duty to the public who vote on the people who set their budgets and by heavy regulation of their own actions.

Deregulation of ATT, brought sharply lower communication costs.
Deregulation of airlines, brought sharply lower airline faires.
Deregulation of Wall St brokers, brought sharply lower commission rates.
Deregulation of natural gas (Reagan era) brough sharply lower gas rates.

Privatization of industries in Britain and Sweden brought much greater performance. Ditto for Russia. Privatization of social security in Chile has been a major success.
etc etc etc.

Government agencies have no duty to anyone. Outside of the top rung they are career bureaucrats who have their jobs essentially for life. The agencies are the least responsive part of government.

 

[JRK]

That is so distorted as to be a lie.
Republicans advocate keeping ALL tax rates from the Bush era intact and support repealing the deficit-increasing payroll tax cut that has failed to stimulate anything.

Why do you need to lie? Are you too stupid or brainwashed to understand the truth?

So, once again you take great pains to agree with me while attempting to sound as if you are disagreeing with me. Please, which of these statements do you find false:

1. Republicans favor maintaining the lower top marginal rate, set to expire next year.

2. Many of those same Republicans favor allowing the payroll tax cut to expire next year.

I know the payroll tax cut was a black man's idea, but still..you can admit you support a tax cut.

I know you're losing badly when you have to play the race card. Doubtless the payroll tax cut was Christine ROmer's idea.

You agree with me that
a) Republicans want to keep all tax rates at the Bush era level. That includes on lower income earners.
b) The payroll tax cut did nothing to spur the economy and has only contrbuted to the deficit.

Which one of those is false? Are proof?

there very desperate
the race card? we elected a black preisedent (not me)
and as far as the payroll tax cut
it is part of the FAILED STIMULUS
and one more thing

who is going to beat Perry for the GOP nomination?
no-one can compete with his job as the gov of texas

 

[JRK]

Oh goody! I figured someone would be along quickly to defend reducing taxes on the wealthiest while increasing taxes on the middle class.

The radio has trained you well, Rabbi. You should run for the Republican nomination.

Translation: I cannot defend the idiotic point I made.

Why not just admit it and move on?

idiotic point? You agreed with my point: Republicans are advocating reducing taxes on the wealthiest while getting rid of a tax cut for the middle class.

The Bush tax cuts were a GOP tax cut
a real tax cut for the middle class, not pennies
BHO did the payroll tax cut just so the left could say exactly what your saying

it did nothing but gave the left the claim they cared for the middle class and the GOP does not
most know better
it failed
besides the UAW got 80 billion that the middle class could gave got

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

6 million people have lost there jobs sense 2008
GM
Chrysler
Stimulus
tarp (Obama's 1/2)
regulations

Ever fact here as an exact opposite fact to some degree with Perry
In Texas, Perry Outshines Obama
this is with a drilling ban in place by Obama
Billions of dollars & thousands of jobs lost with Obama’s Gulf drilling moratorium
it is really that simple

I'm currently supporting Perry, but really, he's got an uphill battle.

First, the Media is going to be excusing Obama at every turn, while amplifying every flaw of Perry's.

Second, the GOP has done a very bad job of connecting with working people. Disgust with Obama does not translate into support of Republicans. Republicans need to disabuse the public that they think the worst part about this recession is that Daddy Warbucks can't buy his daughter a new polo pony.

That said, I think Perry, who is from humble origins, has a better chance of making that connection than Mitt "My Mansion needs expanding" Romney.

First, the Media is going to be excusing Obama at every turn

Doesn't matter. 9.1% unemployment and 1.0% GDP growth means they can't save him.

 

[JRK]

6 million people have lost there jobs sense 2008
GM
Chrysler
Stimulus
tarp (Obama's 1/2)
regulations

Ever fact here as an exact opposite fact to some degree with Perry
In Texas, Perry Outshines Obama
this is with a drilling ban in place by Obama
Billions of dollars & thousands of jobs lost with Obama’s Gulf drilling moratorium
it is really that simple

I'm currently supporting Perry, but really, he's got an uphill battle.

First, the Media is going to be excusing Obama at every turn, while amplifying every flaw of Perry's.

Second, the GOP has done a very bad job of connecting with working people. Disgust with Obama does not translate into support of Republicans. Republicans need to disabuse the public that they think the worst part about this recession is that Daddy Warbucks can't buy his daughter a new polo pony.

That said, I think Perry, who is from humble origins, has a better chance of making that connection than Mitt "My Mansion needs expanding" Romney.

First, the Media is going to be excusing Obama at every turn

Doesn't matter. 9.1% unemployment and 1.0% GDP growth means they can't save him.

obamas train is running off of the tracks
it will not be close in 2012
Thats realville
I really think Perry only runs because the polls weeks ago told him how bad it is for Obama and the GOp had no-one to take up the fight
Texas is a huge success
this counttry has not been

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The GOP actually represents the middle class, especially small business owners, in this country. That is obvious if you look at the new governors. The Dums represent the uber wealthy on either coast and their footmen union workers and black voting bloc.
The GOP governors who were being laughed at here for low approval ratings are seeing their policies bear fruit. Florida has a higher credit rating than the United States. Wisconsin has taken a huge deficit and is turning it into a surplus. New Jersey is back from the dead.
That will play out nationally as well.

It is really that simple

That simple huh? Then why is the GOP trying to blow up SS and Medicare? Those are programs that the working and Middle Class Pay into all their lives and need it to survive when their working days are over. The whole idea of them blowing it up to "save" it is pure bullshit. My in laws are in their early 70's, have a boatload of medical problems and are now Firmly in the middle of the donut hole. They are barely scraping by and thank goodness that my wife and I are in the position to help them out when they need it.... and that's WITH Medicare and SS.

Instead of busting it up and privatizing it, we should be strengthening it. No... the GOP is not for the middle class... they are for their corporate buddies and Wall Street... both of whom want to get their grubby, greedy hands on Social Security(Wall Street) and Medicare(Insurance Companies). They won't be happy until they suck every remaining bit of wealth out of the working and Middle Class of America. After they leave us a shell of a country with next to nothing...they'll move on... I predict China... by the time they tap out the wealth of every day Americans, the Chinese working class should be ripe for the picking.

Then why is the GOP trying to blow up SS and Medicare?

That's like claiming prosecutors "blew up" Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC.

What's your suggestion to strengthen the Ponzi schemes of Medicare and SS?

 

[Political Junky]

The GOP actually represents the middle class, especially small business owners, in this country. That is obvious if you look at the new governors. The Dums represent the uber wealthy on either coast and their footmen union workers and black voting bloc.
The GOP governors who were being laughed at here for low approval ratings are seeing their policies bear fruit. Florida has a higher credit rating than the United States. Wisconsin has taken a huge deficit and is turning it into a surplus. New Jersey is back from the dead.
That will play out nationally as well.

It is really that simple

That simple huh? Then why is the GOP trying to blow up SS and Medicare? Those are programs that the working and Middle Class Pay into all their lives and need it to survive when their working days are over. The whole idea of them blowing it up to "save" it is pure bullshit. My in laws are in their early 70's, have a boatload of medical problems and are now Firmly in the middle of the donut hole. They are barely scraping by and thank goodness that my wife and I are in the position to help them out when they need it.... and that's WITH Medicare and SS.

Instead of busting it up and privatizing it, we should be strengthening it. No... the GOP is not for the middle class... they are for their corporate buddies and Wall Street... both of whom want to get their grubby, greedy hands on Social Security(Wall Street) and Medicare(Insurance Companies). They won't be happy until they suck every remaining bit of wealth out of the working and Middle Class of America. After they leave us a shell of a country with next to nothing...they'll move on... I predict China... by the time they tap out the wealth of every day Americans, the Chinese working class should be ripe for the picking.

The threat of losing Social Security and Medicare will bring out voters in huge numbers to vote against the GOP

 

[Toro]

By the way
who said anything about blowing uo SS or Medicare?
Ryans bill would have allowed Medicare to go private from the nuts and bolts on a slide scale with Govt oversight

it would have changed the year I turn 65 and it does not scare me at all

Have there ever been success stories of government benefits or functions going private?

The big problem with privatization is usually the sudden realization that a profit motive doesn't always translate into providing the best services available. Government agencies have a duty to the public who vote on the people who set their budgets and by heavy regulation of their own actions.

Deregulation of ATT, brought sharply lower communication costs.
Deregulation of airlines, brought sharply lower airline faires.
Deregulation of Wall St brokers, brought sharply lower commission rates.
Deregulation of natural gas (Reagan era) brough sharply lower gas rates.

Privatization of industries in Britain and Sweden brought much greater performance. Ditto for Russia. Privatization of social security in Chile has been a major success.
etc etc etc.

Government agencies have no duty to anyone. Outside of the top rung they are career bureaucrats who have their jobs essentially for life. The agencies are the least responsive part of government.

AT&T wasn't deregulated. It was busted up by government edict. Deregulation of the telecommunications industry happened over a decade later.

I agree with the other stuff. Deregulation is usually - but not always - a positive.

I think the only reason why conservatives are saying the payroll tax added to the deficit is because Obama passed it. If Bush passed it, I have little doubt that you'd be defending it.

In fact, lowering payroll taxes is one of the best tax cuts because it lowers the cost of business. You might be right that it didn't do much to stimulate the economy, given that it likely went straight into savings. But that is also true of many of Bush's tax cuts, such as the checks that were sent to people, the increase in child credit deductions, etc. But since Bush cut those and not Obama, I doubt many conservatives will criticize them.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Perry has massive problems he has to overcome first before he even remotely can challenge Obama.

He for one has never debated anyone. During his election campaigns for governor there was no debates. He cant avoid that this time around. And he sounds like Bush.. I mean literally...

He also has a "left wing" past to contend with. His support for Al Gore is a funny one along with the amount of flip flops on policy that make Kerry look like a straight eagle. He also has his own "he was for it before he was against it" issues.

He also has corruption issues which will come even more out into the open once he is the candidate. That he has earned a pretty penny in the real estate market by buying land cheaply from rich donors/friends and selling them for profit is highly suspect...He is a known player, much like Bush, of the policy "scratch my back and I will scratch your back"

He also has factual issues with his record and his policies. He "balanced" the budget with stimulus money he was against. He claims to have made a ton of jobs in Texas but forgets to mention that a majority of those jobs were government jobs and that most of the remaining were minimum wage jobs from other states. His handling of the wild fires in Texas is another potential problem since he complained over lack of federal help (even though he got it) and then turned around and cut the fire fighting budget to the bone so he could balance his budget.... and then there is the whole balanced budget bullshit in Texas... smoke and mirrors. There are many issues with his record that never have been really vetted in Texas because the GOP controls the state fully thanks to political gerrymandering of districts by Tom Delay and... Rick Perry back in 2003..... gerrymandering that made him pretty much persona non grata in his home town as they lost their representation.

Then there is his pandering to the religious right and his "rallies to show he is not a mormon".

And then there is the big dark secret he has been fighting off for decades and never has been able to shrug off....the dark secret that will make his religious right friends run away screaming.

Now he does have Fox News behind him for now, and unless the other media out lets expose him for who he is, then his only chance is to bury his "issues" in a lot of fluffy and smoke and mirrors ... but if that dark secret comes out then all bets are off and I doubt Fox News will stand by him.

Big dark secret?
His best friend is Bill Ayers?
A convicted felon helped him buy his house?
He can't give a speech without a teleprompter?
He was born in Kenya?
He's a Communist?

I'm dying to know the secret.

 

[JRK]

It is really that simple

That simple huh? Then why is the GOP trying to blow up SS and Medicare? Those are programs that the working and Middle Class Pay into all their lives and need it to survive when their working days are over. The whole idea of them blowing it up to "save" it is pure bullshit. My in laws are in their early 70's, have a boatload of medical problems and are now Firmly in the middle of the donut hole. They are barely scraping by and thank goodness that my wife and I are in the position to help them out when they need it.... and that's WITH Medicare and SS.

Instead of busting it up and privatizing it, we should be strengthening it. No... the GOP is not for the middle class... they are for their corporate buddies and Wall Street... both of whom want to get their grubby, greedy hands on Social Security(Wall Street) and Medicare(Insurance Companies). They won't be happy until they suck every remaining bit of wealth out of the working and Middle Class of America. After they leave us a shell of a country with next to nothing...they'll move on... I predict China... by the time they tap out the wealth of every day Americans, the Chinese working class should be ripe for the picking.

The threat of losing Social Security and Medicare will bring out voters in huge numbers to vote against the GOP

what threat?
and as far as wall street and my SS?
my 401K is doing way good

 

[JRK]

Have there ever been success stories of government benefits or functions going private?

The big problem with privatization is usually the sudden realization that a profit motive doesn't always translate into providing the best services available. Government agencies have a duty to the public who vote on the people who set their budgets and by heavy regulation of their own actions.

Deregulation of ATT, brought sharply lower communication costs.
Deregulation of airlines, brought sharply lower airline faires.
Deregulation of Wall St brokers, brought sharply lower commission rates.
Deregulation of natural gas (Reagan era) brough sharply lower gas rates.

Privatization of industries in Britain and Sweden brought much greater performance. Ditto for Russia. Privatization of social security in Chile has been a major success.
etc etc etc.

Government agencies have no duty to anyone. Outside of the top rung they are career bureaucrats who have their jobs essentially for life. The agencies are the least responsive part of government.

AT&T wasn't deregulated. It was busted up by government edict. Deregulation of the telecommunications industry happened over a decade later.

I agree with the other stuff. Deregulation is usually - but not always - a positive.

I think the only reason why conservatives are saying the payroll tax added to the deficit is because Obama passed it. If Bush passed it, I have little doubt that you'd be defending it.

In fact, lowering payroll taxes is one of the best tax cuts because it lowers the cost of business. You might be right that it didn't do much to stimulate the economy, given that it likely went straight into savings. But that is also true of many of Bush's tax cuts, such as the checks that were sent to people, the increase in child credit deductions, etc. But since Bush cut those and not Obama, I doubt many conservatives will criticize them.

the payroll tax cut is doing exactly what it was suppose to do, give you something to talk about
that pennies per pay check did nothing else
the UAW got 80 billion, you think that fact wis just going to go away?
tax cuts? the Bush tax cuts saved me close to 3000 per year and I make way less than 100K a year

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It gets better - they're also tirelessly defending the need to keep Bush's top marginal rate cut in place while at the same time arguing we need to let the payroll tax cut expire.

In other words, they are tirelessly defending tax cuts for the wealthy while advocating raising taxes on poor and middle class working people.

I'd like to tell you how surprised I am, but I'm not.

Your getting desperate 8537
The payroll tax was part of the FAILED stimulus
I am not going to miss that 8.00 a week
If you allow GWB tax rate to expire I will miss that 3,000 a year
any way I am not sure Perry has made comment on that matter
your talking apples and oranges

Please, JRK: Run on this in 2012. Run on the "fact" that in order to make everyone better off, we need to put more money in the hands of the wealthy and less money in the hands of the middle class.

The road to prosperity is getting a fresh coat of pavement as we speak!

Or we could run on, "Where are the Jobs?"

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It is really that simple

That simple huh? Then why is the GOP trying to blow up SS and Medicare? Those are programs that the working and Middle Class Pay into all their lives and need it to survive when their working days are over. The whole idea of them blowing it up to "save" it is pure bullshit. My in laws are in their early 70's, have a boatload of medical problems and are now Firmly in the middle of the donut hole. They are barely scraping by and thank goodness that my wife and I are in the position to help them out when they need it.... and that's WITH Medicare and SS.

Instead of busting it up and privatizing it, we should be strengthening it. No... the GOP is not for the middle class... they are for their corporate buddies and Wall Street... both of whom want to get their grubby, greedy hands on Social Security(Wall Street) and Medicare(Insurance Companies). They won't be happy until they suck every remaining bit of wealth out of the working and Middle Class of America. After they leave us a shell of a country with next to nothing...they'll move on... I predict China... by the time they tap out the wealth of every day Americans, the Chinese working class should be ripe for the picking.

The threat of losing Social Security and Medicare will bring out voters in huge numbers to vote against the GOP

Vote Obama, 2012.
He'll save Social Security and Medicare just like he saved the economy!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Have there ever been success stories of government benefits or functions going private?

The big problem with privatization is usually the sudden realization that a profit motive doesn't always translate into providing the best services available. Government agencies have a duty to the public who vote on the people who set their budgets and by heavy regulation of their own actions.

Deregulation of ATT, brought sharply lower communication costs.
Deregulation of airlines, brought sharply lower airline faires.
Deregulation of Wall St brokers, brought sharply lower commission rates.
Deregulation of natural gas (Reagan era) brough sharply lower gas rates.

Privatization of industries in Britain and Sweden brought much greater performance. Ditto for Russia. Privatization of social security in Chile has been a major success.
etc etc etc.

Government agencies have no duty to anyone. Outside of the top rung they are career bureaucrats who have their jobs essentially for life. The agencies are the least responsive part of government.

AT&T wasn't deregulated. It was busted up by government edict. Deregulation of the telecommunications industry happened over a decade later.

I agree with the other stuff. Deregulation is usually - but not always - a positive.

I think the only reason why conservatives are saying the payroll tax added to the deficit is because Obama passed it. If Bush passed it, I have little doubt that you'd be defending it.

In fact, lowering payroll taxes is one of the best tax cuts because it lowers the cost of business. You might be right that it didn't do much to stimulate the economy, given that it likely went straight into savings. But that is also true of many of Bush's tax cuts, such as the checks that were sent to people, the increase in child credit deductions, etc. But since Bush cut those and not Obama, I doubt many conservatives will criticize them.

"In fact, lowering payroll taxes is one of the best tax cuts because it lowers the cost of business"

If only Obama had cut them on the business side, I'd agree.

"But since Bush cut those and not Obama, I doubt many conservatives will criticize them"

Those Bush cuts were a waste of money. So were the similar Obama cuts.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That simple huh? Then why is the GOP trying to blow up SS and Medicare? Those are programs that the working and Middle Class Pay into all their lives and need it to survive when their working days are over. The whole idea of them blowing it up to "save" it is pure bullshit. My in laws are in their early 70's, have a boatload of medical problems and are now Firmly in the middle of the donut hole. They are barely scraping by and thank goodness that my wife and I are in the position to help them out when they need it.... and that's WITH Medicare and SS.

Instead of busting it up and privatizing it, we should be strengthening it. No... the GOP is not for the middle class... they are for their corporate buddies and Wall Street... both of whom want to get their grubby, greedy hands on Social Security(Wall Street) and Medicare(Insurance Companies). They won't be happy until they suck every remaining bit of wealth out of the working and Middle Class of America. After they leave us a shell of a country with next to nothing...they'll move on... I predict China... by the time they tap out the wealth of every day Americans, the Chinese working class should be ripe for the picking.

The threat of losing Social Security and Medicare will bring out voters in huge numbers to vote against the GOP

what threat?
and as far as wall street and my SS?
my 401K is doing way good

No kidding. If I had that 12% of my salary added to my 401K, I could retire now.

 

[JRK]

Deregulation of ATT, brought sharply lower communication costs.
Deregulation of airlines, brought sharply lower airline faires.
Deregulation of Wall St brokers, brought sharply lower commission rates.
Deregulation of natural gas (Reagan era) brough sharply lower gas rates.

Privatization of industries in Britain and Sweden brought much greater performance. Ditto for Russia. Privatization of social security in Chile has been a major success.
etc etc etc.

Government agencies have no duty to anyone. Outside of the top rung they are career bureaucrats who have their jobs essentially for life. The agencies are the least responsive part of government.

AT&T wasn't deregulated. It was busted up by government edict. Deregulation of the telecommunications industry happened over a decade later.

I agree with the other stuff. Deregulation is usually - but not always - a positive.

I think the only reason why conservatives are saying the payroll tax added to the deficit is because Obama passed it. If Bush passed it, I have little doubt that you'd be defending it.

In fact, lowering payroll taxes is one of the best tax cuts because it lowers the cost of business. You might be right that it didn't do much to stimulate the economy, given that it likely went straight into savings. But that is also true of many of Bush's tax cuts, such as the checks that were sent to people, the increase in child credit deductions, etc. But since Bush cut those and not Obama, I doubt many conservatives will criticize them.

"In fact, lowering payroll taxes is one of the best tax cuts because it lowers the cost of business"

If only Obama had cut them on the business side, I'd agree.

"But since Bush cut those and not Obama, I doubt many conservatives will criticize them"

Those Bush cuts were a waste of money. So were the similar Obama cuts.

people who do not pay much in income tax give this away with those comments about Bushes tax cuts not working
from 01 to present it has saved me about 20K, maybe as much as 30
I have not done the exact math
I make far less than 100K a year

thats paid for my used truck so a new one could be bought and a travel trailer
That works

 

[The Rabbi]

Have there ever been success stories of government benefits or functions going private?

The big problem with privatization is usually the sudden realization that a profit motive doesn't always translate into providing the best services available. Government agencies have a duty to the public who vote on the people who set their budgets and by heavy regulation of their own actions.

Deregulation of ATT, brought sharply lower communication costs.
Deregulation of airlines, brought sharply lower airline faires.
Deregulation of Wall St brokers, brought sharply lower commission rates.
Deregulation of natural gas (Reagan era) brough sharply lower gas rates.

Privatization of industries in Britain and Sweden brought much greater performance. Ditto for Russia. Privatization of social security in Chile has been a major success.
etc etc etc.

Government agencies have no duty to anyone. Outside of the top rung they are career bureaucrats who have their jobs essentially for life. The agencies are the least responsive part of government.

AT&T wasn't deregulated. It was busted up by government edict. Deregulation of the telecommunications industry happened over a decade later.

I agree with the other stuff. Deregulation is usually - but not always - a positive.

I think the only reason why conservatives are saying the payroll tax added to the deficit is because Obama passed it. If Bush passed it, I have little doubt that you'd be defending it.

In fact, lowering payroll taxes is one of the best tax cuts because it lowers the cost of business. You might be right that it didn't do much to stimulate the economy, given that it likely went straight into savings. But that is also true of many of Bush's tax cuts, such as the checks that were sent to people, the increase in child credit deductions, etc. But since Bush cut those and not Obama, I doubt many conservatives will criticize them.

AT&T was deregulated in the sense that its monopoly was broken. Bu tthe point is taken.
You have no evidence of your claims about what if the GOP had done such and such. Plenty of people on the right opposed Bush's program of sending checks to people, pointing out that it didnt work when Ford or Carter or whoever did it earlier. THat business was a compromise with the Democrats in Congress, btw.
The payroll tax cut has done nothing to help the economy. It wouldn't matter who floated it, the idea sucked.
All tax cuts that are targeted and temporary suck and are ineffective. But the obama administration can't help itself from do-gooding like that.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

AT&T wasn't deregulated. It was busted up by government edict. Deregulation of the telecommunications industry happened over a decade later.

I agree with the other stuff. Deregulation is usually - but not always - a positive.

I think the only reason why conservatives are saying the payroll tax added to the deficit is because Obama passed it. If Bush passed it, I have little doubt that you'd be defending it.

In fact, lowering payroll taxes is one of the best tax cuts because it lowers the cost of business. You might be right that it didn't do much to stimulate the economy, given that it likely went straight into savings. But that is also true of many of Bush's tax cuts, such as the checks that were sent to people, the increase in child credit deductions, etc. But since Bush cut those and not Obama, I doubt many conservatives will criticize them.

"In fact, lowering payroll taxes is one of the best tax cuts because it lowers the cost of business"

If only Obama had cut them on the business side, I'd agree.

"But since Bush cut those and not Obama, I doubt many conservatives will criticize them"

Those Bush cuts were a waste of money. So were the similar Obama cuts.

people who do not pay much in income tax give this away with those comments about Bushes tax cuts not working
from 01 to present it has saved me about 20K, maybe as much as 30
I have not done the exact math
I make far less than 100K a year

thats paid for my used truck so a new one could be bought and a travel trailer
That works

I agree that pretty much any way we can keep more of our own money rather than give it to government, where a huge chunk is wasted, is a good thing.

If you're interested in also stimulating GDP growth, mailing stimulus checks is probably the worst choice.