A Reason for Hope

[Joe Steel]

While the dawning of a new era is only a glimmer on the horizon, we have a reason for hope.

The long night of conservatism is ending.


Karl Rove's grandest aspiration was to create a Republican majority that would dominate American politics for a generation or more. But as the effects of his distinctive brand of fear-mongering fade, it's the Democrats who are poised to become the country's majority party -- and perhaps for a long time to come.

Many conservatives have insisted that the Democrats' wins in the 2006 midterm elections, as well as their recent pickups in some 2007 races, were mere blips. They wish. Political, ideological, demographic and economic trends are all leading toward durable Democratic majorities in Congress, control of most statehouses and, very possibly, the end of the decades-old GOP hammerlock on the electoral college.

This sea change is the result of the electorate's disenchantment with conservative Republicans, beginning in the 1990s. The old conservative majority, as given voice by Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich, sought to cut federal regulation, to privatize government operations and to slash social spending. But by late in Bill Clinton's presidency, broad public majorities had come to back environmental and consumer regulation, as well as significant new government spending on health care and education. As President Bush discovered in 2005, the public also disliked attempts to gut Social Security.

Get Ready for a Democratic Era (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/21/AR2007122101415.html?hpid=opinionsbox1)

[actsnoblemartin]

While I admit the republicans have made some mistakes, democrats wont do any better, infact they will probably do worse joe

merry christmas


While the dawning of a new era is only a glimmer on the horizon, we have a reason for hope.

The long night of conservatism is ending.

[red states rule]

While the dawning of a new era is only a glimmer on the horizon, we have a reason for hope.

The long night of conservatism is ending.

As we speak, approval rating for Pres Bush are rising,a nd the approval ratings for Dems are falling

Sorry to break the good news to you - but the truth wil set your free

[April15]

While I admit the republicans have made some mistakes, democrats wont do any better, infact they will probably do worse joe

merry christmasIt's tough to do worse than failure. All they can do is match his record.

[Sitarro]

The closer we come to becoming a third world nation, the more votes democrats get........ and you think that's a good thing?

The more poor people, the more criminals, the more mentally deranged idiots, the more illegal aliens and the more dumbing down of America........ the more popular the democrats become.

Typical steel, typical.

[pegwinn]

Joe, you are inflicted with label-itis. By holding on labels such as republican, democrat, liberal, conservative, etc etc. You are forgetting the label that matters. American.

Read the political posts in my blog on how to live a label free life while still maintaining an active political interest.

[JohnDoe]

The closer we come to becoming a third world nation, the more votes democrats get........ and you think that's a good thing?

The more poor people, the more criminals, the more mentally deranged idiots, the more illegal aliens and the more dumbing down of America........ the more popular the democrats become.

Typical steel, typical.

So sitarro, with republicans having the rule of congress and the Senate since 1994 thru 2006 we have gotten more poor people, more illegal aliens, more criminals, and more mentally deranged idiots and YOU are blaming the Democrats who did not have the majority or the power behind them?

That makes alot of sense! hahahahahaha! NOT!!!!

What are people suppose to do with all those awful stats? Continue to keep republicans in power as they had been?

And

Merry Christmas,

jd

[nevadamedic]

So sitarro, with republicans having the rule of congress and the Senate since 1994 thru 2006 we have gotten more poor people, more illegal aliens, more criminals, and more mentally deranged idiots and YOU are blaming the Democrats who did not have the majority or the power behind them?

That makes alot of sense! hahahahahaha! NOT!!!!

What are people suppose to do with all those awful stats? Continue to keep republicans in power as they had been?

And

Merry Christmas,

jd

Actually John err Jane we have more illegals thanks to Teddy Kennedy's amnesty bill in the 80's.

[Sitarro]

So sitarro, with republicans having the rule of congress and the Senate since 1994 thru 2006 we have gotten more poor people, more illegal aliens, more criminals, and more mentally deranged idiots and YOU are blaming the Democrats who did not have the majority or the power behind them?

That makes alot of sense! hahahahahaha! NOT!!!!

What are people suppose to do with all those awful stats? Continue to keep republicans in power as they had been?

And

Merry Christmas,

jd

This post is a textbook example of liberal logic, don't blame the people or have them claim responsibility for their actions, blame Republicans.

Oh, by the way John, Congress is the Senate and the House of Representatives.......... the two houses are referred to as Congress.....Duh.

Awful stats? Those are democrat constituents.

[red states rule]

So sitarro, with republicans having the rule of congress and the Senate since 1994 thru 2006 we have gotten more poor people, more illegal aliens, more criminals, and more mentally deranged idiots and YOU are blaming the Democrats who did not have the majority or the power behind them?

That makes alot of sense! hahahahahaha! NOT!!!!

What are people suppose to do with all those awful stats? Continue to keep republicans in power as they had been?

And

Merry Christmas,

jd

JD - have you read any of the links showing incomes across the board have risen over the last 10 years?

Dems for the most part are the open boarders crowd - your party sees them as a new voting block. Libs are opposed to harsher laws to crack down on criminals, and they whine about longer jail terms

Please try to be a bit more rational in your defense of your party

[Hugh Lincoln]

The closer we come to becoming a third world nation, the more votes democrats get........ and you think that's a good thing?

The more poor people, the more criminals, the more mentally deranged idiots, the more illegal aliens and the more dumbing down of America........ the more popular the democrats become.

Right. Karl Rove thought that by letting in floods of illegal Hispanics and then granting them amnesty, they'd all vote Republican. But they do no such thing. Most don't vote, preferring to keep their civic involvement limited to welfare collecting, fraudulent lawsuits and arrests for drunk driving. When they do, it's Democrat all the way.

In fact, non-whites across the board vote Democrat, including Asians, who were by dint of intelligence and law-abidingness expected to be conservatives. Nope. Seems "whitey" is deemed enough of a threat that all this is out the door in favor of the donkey party.

The donkey. Given its prevalence as a mode of transportation in the Third World countries America is quickly becoming, it's appropriate.

[April15]

JD - have you read any of the links showing incomes across the board have risen over the last 10 years?

Dems for the most part are the open boarders crowd - your party sees them as a new voting block. Libs are opposed to harsher laws to crack down on criminals, and they whine about longer jail terms

Please try to be a bit more rational in your defense of your party

I have yet to know someone who is better off now than 10 years ago. The best I see is break even except for those who had money to invest in the fruits of the working mans labor.

[red states rule]

I have yet to know someone who is better off now than 10 years ago. The best I see is break even except for those who had money to invest in the fruits of the working mans labor.

Try looking at the real world - that is a good place to start. The study was based on tax returns filed with the IRS

[actsnoblemartin]

irs stands for

irate retard stealers

:P


Try looking at the real world - that is a good place to start. The study was based on tax returns filed with the IRS

[red states rule]

irs stands for

irate retard stealers

:P

at least Jesse James used a gun when he other people money

[Sitarro]

I have yet to know someone who is better off now than 10 years ago. The best I see is break even except for those who had money to invest in the fruits of the working mans labor.

The working man...... what is that suppose to be? The dems love to use that silly term to further class envy. Are we really suppose to believe that only poor or middle class people work.

[red states rule]

The working man...... what is that suppose to be? The dems love to use that silly term to further class envy. Are we really suppose to believe that only poor or middle class people work.

Many of the rich run their own business, and put in 12 hour days to make it grow

To libs that does not count

[April15]

Try looking at the real world - that is a good place to start. The study was based on tax returns filed with the IRSI live in the real world. I doubt you do. The figures were not adjusted for inflation.

[manu1959]

I have yet to know someone who is better off now than 10 years ago. The best I see is break even except for those who had money to invest in the fruits of the working mans labor.

i make exactly 10 times what i did ten years ago.....

i rented ten years ago now i own a house....

i drove a 1983 honda ten years ago now i drive a porsche....

all my staff make more money and most own homes now....

[Yurt]

i make exactly 10 times what i did ten years ago.....

i rented ten years ago now i own a house....

i drove a 1983 honda ten years ago now i drive a porsche....

all my staff make more money and most own homes now....

most forget or choose to ignore this

[JohnDoe]

This post is a textbook example of liberal logic, don't blame the people or have them claim responsibility for their actions, blame Republicans.

Oh, by the way John, Congress is the Senate and the House of Representatives.......... the two houses are referred to as Congress.....Duh.

Awful stats? Those are democrat constituents.oh pleaseeeeeeeeee......YOU are the one that MADE THAT ANALYSIS and YOU are the one that BLAMED IT ON DEMOCRATS sitarro....I only took your words and showed you how foolish you were with YOUR POST..... since YOU chose to blame these SUPPOSED CONDITIONS on libs Sitarro.....

here is what YOU SAID:



Sitarro The closer we come to becoming a third world nation, the more votes democrats get........ and you think that's a good thing?

The more poor people, the more criminals, the more mentally deranged idiots, the more illegal aliens and the more dumbing down of America........ the more popular the democrats become.

Typical steel, typical.


What i was pointing out, is that you implied that our country has gotten worse and worse... and the worse we have gotten the more people end up voting democratc....the more popular democrats have become should not be a surprise to you.

and IF it is how you say it is.....worse than ever today than in previous years, then it makes sense that people would be voting more democratic than republican....that should not shock you, as it seemed to do, BECAUSE it has been the republicans in full control that would have brought about these horrible conditions that YOU say we are under now....with more poor, more deranged idiots, more illegal immigrants, more criminals etc....because the republicans are the ones that have been in power and are the ones who have controlled the agenda and policies that would have affected these conditions...and who in their right mind would want to keep things the status quo, with republicans ruling all?

I personally do not know that we are becoming a third world country as YOU have said or that there are more poor and more criminals as YOU have said etc....

but if there is, then it makes sense that more people would be leaning democratic now verses supporting the republican folk in congress who have brought about these conditions that you have said are here now.

And yes, I meant to say the House of Reps and the Senate, you are correct that both of them make up the Congress....my bad!

And sorry that my original response to you flew over your head...as it appears it did.


jd

[JohnDoe]

We make 10 times less than we did 10 years ago, but this has been by choice....I retired early and matt has semi retired.

jd

[Dilloduck]

I was married to a crazy woman 10 years ago---I'm MUCH better off now. :laugh2:

[April15]

i make exactly 10 times what i did ten years ago.....

i rented ten years ago now i own a house....

i drove a 1983 honda ten years ago now i drive a porsche....

all my staff make more money and most own homes now....That is good for you and them. I make the same as I did ten years ago. Ten years ago I drove a Ford truck. I drive a Ford truck today. Of the contractors I know all are doing the same as I.

[JohnDoe]

Actually John err Jane we have more illegals thanks to Teddy Kennedy's amnesty bill in the 80's.

Reagan's amnesty bill....

he could have vetoed it, but chose not to.....in fact Reagan supported whole heartedly the amnesty, if memory serves me....

:D

jd

[JohnDoe]

I was married to a crazy woman 10 years ago---I'm MUCH better off now. :laugh2:



:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

hahahahahaha!

Well good for you Dillo, glad to hear you are better off now!

jd

[REDWHITEBLUE2]

While the dawning of a new era is only a glimmer on the horizon, we have a reason for hope.

The long night of conservatism is ending. only in your dreams

[manu1959]

That is good for you and them. I make the same as I did ten years ago. Ten years ago I drove a Ford truck. I drive a Ford truck today. Of the contractors I know all are doing the same as I.

i am sure you have the blame for this situation all sorted out....

[red states rule]

Reagan's amnesty bill....

he could have vetoed it, but chose not to.....in fact Reagan supported whole heartedly the amnesty, if memory serves me....

:D

jd

and he was wrong

Now if libs would learn from history, they would see amnesty did not work, while tax cuts do

[avatar4321]

While the dawning of a new era is only a glimmer on the horizon, we have a reason for hope.

The long night of conservatism is ending.

night of conservatism? So following the Constitution as it was written is somehow a bad thing? Heaven forbid the people support individual freedom, the rule of law, and acting morally toward one another. Heaven forbid people keep more of their money and actually keep a good stewardship over tax money.

Let's just spend ourselves out of existance, treat each other like trash, try to silence other viewpoints by calling others names rather than debating the issues. Let's allow our enemies to just slaughter our friends, our spouses, our children.

After all, the night of freedom is almost over. Time to wake up as slaves and socialists, but then im repeating myself.

[avatar4321]

The working man...... what is that suppose to be? The dems love to use that silly term to further class envy. Are we really suppose to believe that only poor or middle class people work.

He is the guy the Democrats want to tax. Meanwhile those people that dont work a minute for their money like Ted Kennedy and John Kerry dont have to worry about their taxes. They already have their money. Rather than punish the rich as the Democrats would like you to think, all they want to do is keep the middle class and poor from ever becoming rich and ruining their power base.

Heaven forbid that happen.

[avatar4321]

and he was wrong

Now if libs would learn from history, they would see amnesty did not work, while tax cuts do

History doesn't matter. What works doesnt matter. All that matters is providing the "image" that the politicians have the right motives. Whether the policies actually accomplish anything is irrelevant. Because it's the image that they are using to gain their power. If they fixed the problems, they would be irrelevant.

[red states rule]

He is the guy the Democrats want to tax. Meanwhile those people that dont work a minute for their money like Ted Kennedy and John Kerry dont have to worry about their taxes. They already have their money. Rather than punish the rich as the Democrats would like you to think, all they want to do is keep the middle class and poor from ever becoming rich and ruining their power base.

Heaven forbid that happen.

Libs are out to punish achievement and those who take risks - and their base buys all the class envy crap that if you are rich you do not deserve your wealth

[JohnDoe]

Libs are out to punish achievement and those who take risks - and their base buys all the class envy crap that if you are rich you do not deserve your wealthSo, once again RSR, what do you suggest? We already know that the poor do not pay anything in income taxes, so if you want the rich to pay less in taxes than they do, are you supporting the middle class to get a tax hike to pay for the tax break for the rich? Yes or no? Do you want the taxes to go up for the middle class to compensate for the tax cuts you want to give the rich?

jd

[Abbey Marie]

Actually John err Jane we have more illegals thanks to Teddy Kennedy's amnesty bill in the 80's.

Not to mention all the fallout from the dangerously liberal rulings of activist liberal judges on the Federal courts. We will pay for those for decades.

[Joe Steel]

As we speak, approval rating for Pres Bush are rising,a nd the approval ratings for Dems are falling

Sorry to break the good news to you - but the truth wil set your free

Here's some truth for you.

The Democrats ratings are falling because they're not doing anything about Bush. America hates Bush so much they can't tolerate even a Democratically-controlled Congress who won't do anything about him.

[Joe Steel]

While I admit the republicans have made some mistakes, democrats wont do any better, infact they will probably do worse joe

merry christmas

Happy New Year!

Let's hope it's a year of Democratic attempts to remove Bush from office and erase the stain of Conservatism from the fabric of American life.

That, indeed, would make it happy.

[Joe Steel]

The closer we come to becoming a third world nation, the more votes democrats get........ and you think that's a good thing?

Certainly. Eventually the votes will give Democrats unfettered control of the government and we'll stop becoming a third world country.

[MtnBiker]

Happy New Year!

Let's hope it's a year of Democratic attempts to remove Bush from office and erase the stain of Conservatism from the fabric of American life.

That, indeed, would make it happy.

Hey Joe, let me tell you a secret. Bush is leaving office in about 13 months.

[Immanuel]

Forgive me Joe, but when reading your OP the only think I could think of is that age old saying, "Out of the frying pan and into the fire." The Republicans have not been good for us lately but neither have, nor will, the current crop of Democrats. There really is not a whole hell of a lot of difference between the two anyway.

It would be a heck of a lot better for us if we would work together to reorganize our political system and do away with the two parties who have bound together to enslave us.

Immie

[typomaniac]

Let's just spend ourselves out of existance, treat each other like trash, try to silence other viewpoints by calling others names rather than debating the issues.

That's exactly what the pubbies have been doing for the last 7 years. :lol:

[avatar4321]

That's exactly what the pubbies have been doing for the last 7 years. :lol:

other than the spending, that is downright false.

[typomaniac]

other than the spending, that is downright false.

It's ridiculous to try to deny it. The majority of GOP propaganda says nothing more than that the audience needs to hate the liberals.

[Sitarro]

So, once again RSR, what do you suggest? We already know that the poor do not pay anything in income taxes, so if you want the rich to pay less in taxes than they do, are you supporting the middle class to get a tax hike to pay for the tax break for the rich? Yes or no? Do you want the taxes to go up for the middle class to compensate for the tax cuts you want to give the rich?

jd

Ya see Doe, you read everything with a liberal eye. When you see that wealthy people might be getting a tax cut, you read it as if they will be paying less, that is wrong. The wealthy tend to be the natural producers in society, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry being exceptions. The producers would be getting a percentage cut in the taxes they pay...... that makes them feel less raped by the system and gives them an incentive to produce more which in turn produces more jobs and more tax dollars. It's kind of like "The Goose that Laid The Golden Egg", you can only steal so many eggs before the goose decides to quite laying them.

[red states rule]

Ya see Doe, you read everything with a liberal eye. When you see that wealthy people might be getting a tax cut, you read it as if they will be paying less, that is wrong. The wealthy tend to be the natural producers in society, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry being exceptions. The producers would be getting a percentage cut in the taxes they pay...... that makes them feel less raped by the system and gives them an incentive to produce more which in turn produces more jobs and more tax dollars. It's kind of like "The Goose that Laid The Golden Egg", you can only steal so many eggs before the goose decides to quite laying them.

Libs like JD even admit the fact the rich are paying more in taxes after the tax cut is meaningless. They are whining about the percentage of their income they are paying in taxes.

JD dismisses the fact the rich pay over 50% of their money in taxes. The middle class does not pay anywhere near that amount in taxes

If fact, the 50% of the wage earners pay 97% of all Federal Income taxs, while the "poor" pay the remaining 3%

Libs like JD se the rich as a never ending renewable money source

[Sitarro]

It's ridiculous to try to deny it. The majority of GOP propaganda says nothing more than that the audience needs to hate the liberals.

That is ridiculous, liberals don't need anyone pointing out a reason to dislike them....... anyone with common sense can plainly see plenty of reasons to dislike them.

Off topic...... What reasoning do you have to refer to Mitt Romney Hitler?

[red states rule]

It's ridiculous to try to deny it. The majority of GOP propaganda says nothing more than that the audience needs to hate the liberals.

Conservatives are on the receiving end of liberal love and tolerance on a daily basis. Libs wish those who disagree wish them death, terminal illness, and hope they are tortured at the hands of terrorists

If you want to see hate, look at the left

[typomaniac]

That is ridiculous, liberals don't need anyone pointing out a reason to dislike them....... anyone with common sense can plainly see plenty of reasons to dislike them.And yet the right's "consultants" spend millions of dollars a year finding new ways for the talking heads to say it. Why is that, do you think? :poke:


Off topic...... What reasoning do you have to refer to Mitt Romney Hitler?He gets his money from the same people who back this guy:

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a20/dpeyton/bush_hitler_350.jpg

[Sitarro]

And yet the right's "consultants" spend millions of dollars a year finding new ways for the talking heads to say it. Why is that, do you think? :poke:

He gets his money from the same people who back this guy:



I'm curious, how many times a day do you get the shit slapped out of you and are then told "SHUT UP YOU IMBECILE!"?

[typomaniac]

I'm curious, how many times a day do you get the shit slapped out of you and are then told "SHUT UP YOU IMBECILE!"?
I'm usually on the other end of that exchange.

So shut up, you fucking redneck imbecile.

[Hagbard Celine]

at least Jesse James used a gun when he other people money

You're wrong about Dem "numbers" as you posted somewhere above. The reason Dem numbers are low (not as low as Bush's) is because they haven't done enough to end the war in Iraq, which is the issue they got voted in on. Regardless of what Rush told you, it's NOT because their philosophy is inherently inferior.
Now, what on Earth were you trying to say in the incoherent post I quoted? Speak English much?

[Kathianne]

You're wrong about Dem "numbers" as you posted somewhere above. The reason Dem numbers are low (not as low as Bush's) is because they haven't done enough to end the war in Iraq, which is the issue they got voted in on. Regardless of what Rush told you, it's NOT because their philosophy is inherently inferior.
Now, what on Earth were you trying to say in the incoherent post I quoted? Speak English much?

Actually Bush's approval rating is higher than Democrats in Congress:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2007-12-17-congresspoll_N.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/news/polls/tables/live/2007-12-17-politics1.htm?loc=interstitialskip

[Sitarro]

I'm usually on the other end of that exchange.

So shut up, you fucking redneck imbecile.

Gee, Mr. Happy-gay-lucky has a temper, do you see pink when you get mad?:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

[typomaniac]

Gee, Mr. Happy-gay-lucky has a temper, do you see pink when you get mad?:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Another one who's sweet on me, I see. Forget it, Joe; not gonna happen. :talk2hand:

[Sitarro]

Another one who's sweet on me, I see. Forget it, Joe; not gonna happen. :talk2hand:

I'm not Joe Steel but I can certainly see why you would be attracted to him...... you boys "don't-think" exactly alike.

[Nukeman]

I'm usually on the other end of that exchange.

So shut up, you fucking redneck imbecile.

Do you actually know where this term comes from????? If you did I doubt you would use at as in insult to conservatives!!!

[BoogyMan]

So sitarro, with republicans having the rule of congress and the Senate since 1994 thru 2006 we have gotten more poor people, more illegal aliens, more criminals, and more mentally deranged idiots and YOU are blaming the Democrats who did not have the majority or the power behind them?

That makes alot of sense! hahahahahaha! NOT!!!!

What are people suppose to do with all those awful stats? Continue to keep republicans in power as they had been?

And

Merry Christmas,

jd

You have to admit Joe that it was the current congress that gutted the border barrier bill and seems intent on a porous and dangerously open border.

To think that any of the current congress critters who have voted to maintain the status quo of a downwardly spiraling nation might care in the slightest degree about anyone other than themselves is foolishly naive.

[typomaniac]

I'm not Joe Steel but I can certainly see why you would be attracted to him...... you boys "don't-think" exactly alike.

I know you're not Joe Steel: you're Homo Joe. And you "don't-think" at all.

[red states rule]

You're wrong about Dem "numbers" as you posted somewhere above. The reason Dem numbers are low (not as low as Bush's) is because they haven't done enough to end the war in Iraq, which is the issue they got voted in on. Regardless of what Rush told you, it's NOT because their philosophy is inherently inferior.
Now, what on Earth were you trying to say in the incoherent post I quoted? Speak English much?

Maybe at CNN they report what they want and only go with polls that approve of, but Pres Bush has much higher approval numbers then the Dem run Congress

The last Rasmussen poll had Pres Bush at 38% while the last Gallup poll had the Dem Congress at 22%

When you average all the polls, Pres Bush is at 35.4% - the Dem Congress comes in at 25%

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/

I am sure CNN will never report these polls

[JohnDoe]

Ya see Doe, you read everything with a liberal eye. When you see that wealthy people might be getting a tax cut, you read it as if they will be paying less, that is wrong. The wealthy tend to be the natural producers in society, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry being exceptions. The producers would be getting a percentage cut in the taxes they pay...... that makes them feel less raped by the system and gives them an incentive to produce more which in turn produces more jobs and more tax dollars. It's kind of like "The Goose that Laid The Golden Egg", you can only steal so many eggs before the goose decides to quite laying them.
Sitarro,
I don't think I see an answer to the questions in my post that you quoted?

So, are you saying that you SUPPORT putting more of the tax burden on to the middle class in order to reduce the tax burden on the "wealthiest"?

There is not a way around this, it is a yes or no answer imo?

Do you want to raise taxes on the middle class in order to give additional tax breaks to the wealthiest?

And as far as your goose and the golden egg theory...Tell me why the elite that had tax brackets reaching 70% - 90% in income taxes at one time in our history...continued on laying those golden eggs and didn't just sit on their bums providing no more golden eggs? Why didn't they stop producing golden eggs as you say they do when we actually did tax them at these much, much, much higher tax rates than they do now?

I don't think it is in our nature to just stop producing.... Even if people get pushed in to a higher tax bracket becaseu of raises, the taxes go up only for the amount that passes the bracket cut off and they still bring home more in money than they did before they reached the higher bracket?

No one comes home with less money if they produced more and got paid more for it....one still brings home more money if they make more money... even if they are pushed in to a higher tax bracket for the same 40 hour week?

*Sitarro, it took 4 years before we finally got up to the level of taxes collected prior to the Bush tax cut....This money still has not been made up....it DID NOT WORK as the Reagan and Kennedy tax cuts for the rich worked because it was NOT a drastic cut as bringing taxes on the wealthiest from about 70% down to about 35%..... These tax cuts by President Bush did not work to do this... bring more in taxes and pay for themselves.

In theory, it makes sense and it has worked in the past... a few decades ago, but it did not give us the same results this time around.

jd

[red states rule]

Sitarro,
I don't think I see an answer to the questions in my post that you quoted?

So, are you saying that you SUPPORT putting more of the tax burden on to the middle class in order to reduce the tax burden on the "wealthiest"?

There is not a way around this, it is a yes or no answer imo?

Do you want to raise taxes on the middle class in order to give additional tax breaks to the wealthiest?

And as far as your goose and the golden egg theory...Tell me why the elite that paid 70% - 90% in income taxes at one time in our history and continued on laying those golden eggs and didn't just sit on their bums providing no more golden eggs? Why didn't they stop producing golden eggs as you say they do when we actually did tax them at these much, much, much higher tax rates than they do now?

I don't think it is in our nature to just stop producing.... Even if people get pushed in to a higher tax bracket becaseu of raises, the taxes go up only for the amount that passes the bracket cut off and they still bring home more in money than they did before they reached the higher bracket?

No one comes home with less money if they produced more and got paid more for it....one still brings home more money if they make more money... even if they are pushed in to a higher tax bracket for the same 40 hour week?

jd


JD, the tax burden is on those who are the go getters and risk takers. Again, the top 1% make only 18% of the money yet they pay 36% of the income taxes

Your Dems want to INCREASE taxes on EVERYONE. Even retired folks making $40,000/yr

What you libs refuse to accept is, the "rich" are paying MORE in taxes AFTER the tax cut

But that is not good enough for guiys is it?

[JohnDoe]

You have to admit Joe that it was the current congress that gutted the border barrier bill and seems intent on a porous and dangerously open border.

To think that any of the current congress critters who have voted to maintain the status quo of a downwardly spiraling nation might care in the slightest degree about anyone other than themselves is foolishly naive. No Boogey, I do not admit that....the effort to gut it was immediately after the original bill was passed by an effort from senator Kay Bailey Huchison (R) a republican senator from Texas. There was 2 threads that covered this on this site, one by Stephanie and one by Abbey I believe it was shown that one of the people that put out the big push to gut it was her and other republicans that supported her amendment/bill that did such.

ok, found an article on it, here is just part of it:


"After the Secure Fence Act of 2006 was signed into law by President Bush in October 2006, millions of Americans had a right to expect a double-layer fence would be built along our border with Mexico," Elliott said.

"Now, if the Hutchison amendment gets signed into law that fence is never going to be built," he said.

Elliott said the language of the amendment from Hutchison (S. Amdt. 2466) specifically would exempt the Department of Homeland Security from having to build any fence at all.

The Hutchison amendment reads, in part, " … nothing in this paragraph shall require the Secretary of Homeland Security to install fencing, physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras, and sensors in a particular location along an international border of the United States, if the Secretary determines that the use or placement of such resources is not the most appropriate means to achieve and maintain operational control over the international border at such location."

"By slipping the Hutchison amendment into the DHS funding bill, Hutchison intends to give DHS total discretion to build a fence or to not build a fence in any particular location. That is not what the American people were led to believe would happen when Congress passed the Secure Fence Act in 2006," Elliott said.

In a special report filed on the Grassfire website titled "Border Fence Funding Hoax of 2006 and 2007," Elliott argues Hutchison first suggested this type of legislative modification on the very day the Secure Fence Act of 2006 was passed.

"A deal had already been struck to basically un-do the Secure Fence Act before the vote was ever taken," Elliott said.

In the report, Elliott says the Secure Fence Act was a carefully staged public relations event designed by Republicans "to create the impression that Congress was clamping down on illegal immigration.

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59159


And I am NOT saying that SOME members of the Democratic party are not pushing for/ routing for the fence to not be built, just that many Republicans including the President are and have been working behind the scenes to gut the fence.

This is NOT a one sided situation.

jd

[JohnDoe]

JD, the tax burden is on those who are the go getters and risk takers. Again, the top 1% make only 18% of the money yet they pay 36% of the income taxes

Your Dems want to INCREASE taxes on EVERYONE. Even retired folks making $40,000/yr

What you libs refuse to accept is, the "rich" are paying MORE in taxes AFTER the tax cut

But that is not good enough for guiys is it?

Good Morning Rsr :)

Please provide a link for this that shows Dems wanting to raise taxes on seniors making $40k....

And again, if you reduce the taxes on the rich then who are you going to get more taxes from? I say that it will affect the middle class and you are advocating that the middle class pays more in taxes so to be able to give the wealthy more of their money back....IS THIS TRUE?

*The pulling in more taxes cuz you tax the rich less did not work last time and the tax cut did not "pay for itself".... And sure we can keep borrowing more money because of the budget deficits, but this is already coming back to bite us in the butt, with much higher interest payment, including what is borrowed from the SS surpluses, we had to pay $406 billion in 2006 as the Interest Payment alone, on our National Debt. That's ALOT of money just going down the drain and in to China's and Japan's and Saudi Arabia's hands, alot of our tax dollars basically going towards nothing that benefits us, the tax payers.

jd

[BoogyMan]

No Boogey, I do not admit that....the effort to gut it was immediately after the original bill was passed by an effort from senator Kay Bailey Huchison (R) a republican senator from Texas. There was 2 threads that covered this on this site, one by Stephanie and one by Abbey I believe it was shown that one of the people that put out the big push to gut it was her and other republicans that supported her amendment/bill that did such.

ok, found an article on it, here is just part of it:

And I am NOT saying that SOME members of the Democratic party are not pushing for/ routing for the fence to not be built, just that many Republicans including the President are and have been working behind the scenes to gut the fence.

This is NOT a one sided situation.

jd

The simple fact that you can point to someone on the conservative side of the aisle who sponsored moronic legislation that agrees with the open borders left doesn't resolve the issue. There certainly is a solid anti border barrier position staked out by MOST of the majority party and no amount of obfuscatory activity such as the "well one on your side of the aisle thinks that way too" finger pointing will change that.

Thanks for the article, Hutchinson is getting a letter from me this morning.

[JohnDoe]

The simple fact that you can point to someone on the conservative side of the aisle who sponsored moronic legislation that agrees with the open borders left doesn't resolve the issue. There certainly is a solid anti border barrier position staked out by MOST of the majority party and no amount of obfuscatory activity such as the "well one on your side of the aisle thinks that way too" finger pointing will change that.

Thanks for the article, Hutchinson is getting a letter from me this morning.
YOur welcome on the article! :)

And Hutchison was not alone on the republican side...., they could have filibustered this legislation like they have with most every bit of legislation introduced by the Democrats in the senate Boogy, but they didn't as far as I can tell.

And yes, I do not disagree that a great deal of Democrats and some Republicans like McCain and Spector for two, do agree with giving amnesty to the immigrants that have been here for 5 years, or something like this...AND at the same time do agree with funding and securing our borders.

many people however, are not on the same page on how to deal with this, like me...and i have expressed such in many of the threads on this subject of illegal immigration.

jd

[pegwinn]

For the tax attorneys out there. Isn't it about time to scrap the income tax, repeal the 16th amendment, and institute the FairTax?

Then you don't have to worry about who pays more. And as an added side benefit, you will know just by going to the 7/11 if taxes were raised.

[red states rule]

Good Morning Rsr :)

Please provide a link for this that shows Dems wanting to raise taxes on seniors making $40k....

And again, if you reduce the taxes on the rich then who are you going to get more taxes from? I say that it will affect the middle class and you are advocating that the middle class pays more in taxes so to be able to give the wealthy more of their money back....IS THIS TRUE?

*The pulling in more taxes cuz you tax the rich less did not work last time and the tax cut did not "pay for itself".... And sure we can keep borrowing more money because of the budget deficits, but this is already coming back to bite us in the butt, with much higher interest payment, including what is borrowed from the SS surpluses, we had to pay $406 billion in 2006 as the Interest Payment alone, on our National Debt. That's ALOT of money just going down the drain and in to China's and Japan's and Saudi Arabia's hands, alot of our tax dollars basically going towards nothing that benefits us, the tax payers.

jd

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/RobertDNovak/2007/05/21/lying_about_taxes

Here is your link JD. Dems voted to repeal ALL the Bush tax cuts - including the tax cut you and your husband got

JD - those evil rivh people you want to attack got a tax cut - but they are paying MORE in taxes after the tax cut. Thye invest the money, grow the economy, their business, and investments - thus they pay more in taxes since they are making more

You also seem to ignore the fact, tax revenues are soaring year after year - and the deficit is dropping year after year

JD, you need to get over your wealth envy and look at the numbers. Tax cuts help everyone and help grow the economy. The top 1% earn 18% of the money but pay 36% of federal income taxes

The "poor" pay only 4%

Do you remember the Luxury tax Dems passed in the late 1980's? It was intended to hit the rich who bought huge expensive yachts. Libs thumped their chests and said the rich were going to pay their fair share

Guess what happened JD? The rich stopped buying yachts. When that happened the workers in the ship yards lost their jobs. Companies that built the yachts closed up. Local, state, and Federal tax money dropped

The Republican Congress repealed the tax, and Clinton signed off on it in the early 90's

Now the rich are buying yachts, the companies that build them are back in operation, and people are back to work building them

Do you get the point JD?