• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama says Senate plan ‘only viable way’ to prevent tax hike

Dickieboy said:
Because the bigger answer is that this whole PR tax cut thing is a dinky gimmick BY BOTH PARTIES to try to spur demand. But the predicted demand growth will come at the expense of the stability of Social Security and Medicare. It would make more sense to reduce income tax rates, even temporarily, on whomever. [...]
Click to expand...
False.

It makes more sense to reduce taxes on those who are most likely to spend the tax savings -- the middle class and the poor (if the intent is to stimulate consumption). Given the blood oath the Republicans have taken to not reduce taxes on the poor without reducing taxes on the rich (who would contribute essentially nothing to consumer demand as a result), reducing payroll taxes is a way to work around Republican intransigence (i.e., since the rich do not pay much in the way of payroll taxes, most of the cut goes to the poor and middle class instead of the rich).

The Republicans do not like the poor and middle class getting a break, while the rich do not, so they are doing everything possible to poison the payroll tax cut extension, or at least extract as much blood from Obama as possible, in the way of attachments such as the XL pipeline. Quite simply the GOP is fueled by hate and greed, which has been supercharged by the Tea Party caucus.
 
misterman said:
That's your answer. I wonder what the typical Republican in the House would say.
Click to expand...

Because 'my answer' is to 'reduce income tax rates' and the Republicans signed the Norquist pledge I can only assume they would agree to REDUCE rates on whoever. Am I missing something?
 
Gill said:
Very good..... Obama SHALL approve the pipeline UNLESS he doesn't want to. [...]
Click to expand...
Another intellectually dishonest claim. The truth:

Obama SHALL approve the pipeline UNLESS he finds it NOT IN THE NATIONAL INTEREST. If he finds it not in the national interest, he SHALL file a timely report with various people, some of whom likely hate his guts, EXPLAINING WHY he does not find it in the national interest.

At that point we can safely assume a back-stabbing media campaign will begin, quite possibly including legal action to rule his non-national-interest reasoning null and void, allowing the pipeline project to proceed.

The House bill DOES NOT ALLOW Obama to merely refuse to approve the pipeline "because he doesn't want to".



________________________________________
"The truth shall make you free" -- John 8:32
 
Karl said:
Given the blood oath the Republicans have taken to not reduce taxes on the poor without reducing taxes on the rich...
Click to expand...

Please proved source for such...thanks

Karl said:
The Republicans do not like the poor and middle class getting a break...
Click to expand...

And source this also...


And, again if this Keystone thingy was so rancorous why did Senate Democrats pass their version with the SAME LANGUAGE?
 
Karl said:
The House bill DOES NOT ALLOW Obama to merely refuse to approve the pipeline "because he doesn't want to".
Click to expand...

What in the House bill disallows 'because he doesn't want to'? How is the Senate bill different?
 
Dickieboy said:
What in the House bill disallows 'because he doesn't want to'? [...]
Click to expand...
Where does it allow him to?

As much as it has been discussed and posted, you are still unclear on the pipeline specifics of the bill? Or are you still trying to take refuge in semantics? If so, it is a really stupid tactic, but one the Republicans would be overjoyed to see Obama take (for if he does not submit written reasoning that the pipeline is not in the national interest, then the pipeline automatically becomes law).
 
Karl said:
Where does it allow him to?

As much as it has been discussed and posted, you are still unclear on the pipeline specifics of the bill? Or are you still trying to take refuge in semantics? If so, it is a really stupid tactic, but one the Republicans would be overjoyed to see Obama take (for if he does not submit written reasoning that the pipeline is not in the national interest, then the pipeline automatically becomes law).
Click to expand...

Ok, you're right it doesn't allow BHO to do that. I am past that. I am, and have been, asking that if Senate bill or House bill whichever passes the language is the same. In the end the result will be the same, backed by BOTH Democrat or Republican. So what is your point?
 
Dickieboy said:
Ok, you're right it doesn't allow BHO to do that. I am past that. I am, and have been, asking that if Senate bill or House bill whichever passes the language is the same. In the end the result will be the same, backed by BOTH Democrat or Republican. So what is your point?
Click to expand...
That this claim is incorrect:

Gill said:
[...] The House bill NEVER had a requirement that Obama approve the pipeline. [...]
Click to expand...
 
Karl said:
That this claim is incorrect:
Click to expand...

How inconsequential. Great debate victory! Go have a beer on me…figuratively of course.

Now can we stipulate that whichever bill gets past BHO will have to decide on Keystone based on bipartisan congressional pressure?
 
He doesn't have to say much more than "I don't believe it's in the national interest" though. I mean, really, you think he can't find some justification? You could find a good sounding argument either in favor for or against the pipeline in 30 seconds with Google. Copy and paste and bam, you're done. My prediction is we'll have the pipeline turned down within 60 days, or they'll give him extra time in the next short-term extension of the payroll tax bill because they don't want him to say no. No doubt it'll continue to be an issue as the 60 day extension expires and there will be attempts, perhaps successful, perhaps not, to mandate the pipeline happens. More likely, it'll just set up another delayed decision or time to study or whatever... Not like we have to wait too long to find out.
 
vvx said:
My prediction is we'll have the pipeline turned down within 60 days
Click to expand...

On a pessimistic note I hope he does. This will pave the way for Canada to negotiate the suggested deal with China and circumvent any benefits the US could realize. Being long in years and having no offspring these developments will be inconsequential to me and mine BUT those of you younger need to pay attention as these decisions will lay the foundation for YOUR future. Of course you can rely on wind (when it blows) and solar (when the sun shines) to power your future.
 
Karl said:
That this claim is incorrect:
Click to expand...

You are all alone on this. Have you noticed that none of the many liberals on this board have come in to support you???

hint: they all know you are dead wrong.
 
Gill said:
You are all alone on this. Have you noticed that none of the many liberals on this board have come in to support you???

hint: they all know you are dead wrong.
Click to expand...

Instead of backing up your ridiculous claims, you're busy spewing more crap, sprinkle with the usual empty talk of "liberals."
 
teamosil said:
Now they put the house into recess right when the Democrats tried to force a vote. They know they would lose the vote so they're resorting to procedural tricks to try to prevent the middle class from getting one of the tax cuts that they are so adamant the rich need. It's disgusting. They are betraying the American people. Remember what they did today every time you pay your Boehner tax.
Click to expand...

There's a far simpler explanation. In the Military this would be known as a "Demonstration".

In military terminology, a demonstration is show of force on a front where a decision is not sought, made with the aim of deceiving the enemy.
Click to expand...

Boehner never intended to have the Senate come back, stop this particular two month bill, etc. What he needed was a couple days of showing that the House GOP wanted a one year deal, sees this most unusual 2-month farce as kicking the can, etc. The big political fight will be in Feb, and we all know that, do we not ? This entire "payroll tax" cut was jizzed up from the beginning to be a poltical wedge class-envy issue, and Obama's reelection effort requires that it be a mess such that he can blame the GOP.

Boehner was only staking out some points for when that Feb fight gets ugly. And in that, he has succeeded.
 
Last edited:
teamosil said:
Now they put the house into recess right when the Democrats tried to force a vote. They know they would lose the vote so they're resorting to procedural tricks to try to prevent the middle class from getting one of the tax cuts that they are so adamant the rich need. It's disgusting. They are betraying the American people. Remember what they did today every time you pay your Boehner tax.
Click to expand...

You know this payroll tax cut is for everyone that pays payroll taxes, regardless of income level?

Actaully, it's insulting to the American people to think they're going to be bought off with a 10-20 dollar a week tax cut.

If they want to cut something, they can cut the ****ing bonus tax.
 
Look people, we all just lost with this travesty of a so called deal. Period.

Stunts by demos, mixed in with political BS, all holding we the people hostage to their agenda, while not caring one damned bit what happens in the real world to people looking for some kind of relief in this 3 year nightmare that has been demo dictate.

Repubs are no better setting themselves up to stand on principle, then cave and look like doofuses? Good God. is this how we now run a country? in 2 month blocks because demo's are playing games?

This is stupid! robbing the SS system so that you can give me $20 per week and then go out there and claim that you cut taxes, (when we all know that SS is not a tax) is the height of arrogance in dishonesty.

We should all be proud people, we have turned into selfish, greedy, backstabbing ingrates of this country that can be bought for $20...God help us.


j-mac
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom