~Following My Own Flow~
Remember folks, there is a distinct difference between wanting a President's policies to fail and wanting America to fail. Wanting a President's policies to fail is actually a poor way to say what one really means. What the statement REALLY means is that one does not want a President's policies to PASS and become law. America can succeed even, regardless of this.
"Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run
Mace Windu: Then our worst fears have been realized. We must move quickly if the Jedi Order is to survive.
I asked if people want Obama to fail and the answer was yes. Seems clear to me that some want him to fall and his fall would mean we fail. Just my thoughts.
~Following My Own Flow~
This is malarkey.
If a president fails there is too much of a chance of causing more GI casualties. Of course this is something that draft dodging Rush would ever consider. His soft butt is well safe.
"If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples so that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I'd be okay. But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. As radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution at least as its been interpreted and the Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties, says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf, and that hasn't shifted, and one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about distributive change. And in some ways we still suffer from that." -Obama
Understanding the constitution and defending it, as he swore to do but clearly will not, are two entirely different things.
According to Scorpion89, most folks in this country know nothing about Constitution, Bill of Rights or the Federalist Papers.
~Following My Own Flow~
I want Obama to fail because he is a socialist and is eager to sign socialist legislation into law. For him it is not about what is best, it's about settling scores.
Don't believe me? Read the following, it's chilling because he totally disregards history or the greatest good for the greatest number. His interests are narrow, and he also reveals a hammer with regards to healthcare and how he thinks future generations will fund it.
It's moronic, and is why I want him to fail. If his schemes had worked in one place, there might be hope, but they haven't, and I have no hope that our government will run these ridiculous Ponzi schemes effectively in the future.
The Tax Foundation - Obama and Gibson Capital Gains Tax ExchangeGIBSON: All right. You have, however, said you would favor an increase in the capital gains tax. As a matter of fact, you said on CNBC, and I quote, "I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton," which was 28 percent. It's now 15 percent. That's almost a doubling, if you went to 28 percent.
But actually, Bill Clinton, in 1997, signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent.
GIBSON: And George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent.
GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down.
So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?
OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I've said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.
We saw an article today which showed that the top 50 hedge fund managers made $29 billion last year -- $29 billion for 50 individuals. And part of what has happened is that those who are able to work the stock market and amass huge fortunes on capital gains are paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries. That's not fair.
And what I want is not oppressive taxation. I want businesses to thrive, and I want people to be rewarded for their success. But what I also want to make sure is that our tax system is fair and that we are able to finance health care for Americans who currently don't have it and that we're able to invest in our infrastructure and invest in our schools.
And you can't do that for free.
OBAMA: And you can't take out a credit card from the Bank of China (LOL SO WHAT DOES HE DO, SPEND BY THE TRILLIONS!) in the name of our children and our grandchildren, and then say that you're cutting taxes, which is essentially what John McCain has been talking about.
And that is irresponsible. I believe in the principle that you pay as you go. And, you know, you don't propose tax cuts, unless you are closing other tax breaks for individuals. And you don't increase spending, unless you're eliminating some spending or you're finding some new revenue. That's how we got an additional $4 trillion worth of debt under George Bush. That is helping to undermine our economy. And it's going to change when I'm president of the United States.
GIBSON: But history shows that when you drop the capital gains tax, the revenues go up.
OBAMA: Well, that might happen, or it might not. It depends on what's happening on Wall Street and how business is going. I think the biggest problem that we've got on Wall Street right now is the fact that we got have a housing crisis that this president has not been attentive to and that it took John McCain three tries before he got it right.
And if we can stabilize that market, and we can get credit flowing again, then I think we'll see stocks do well. And once again, I think we can generate the revenue that we need to run this government and hopefully to pay down some of this debt.
Both Gibson and Obama show their ignorance on the topic of capital gains taxation in this exchange. Gibson's implying that cutting capital gains taxes raises tax revenues by the mere time series correlation he cited was a stretch. Much of the short-run response to changes in the capital gains tax rate are for tax timing purposes. This is a well-known fact, and it is why CBO projects a huge spike in capital gains collections in 2010 (the last year of the scheduled low 15% rate on long-term gains) and thereby also a large decline in 2011 (when the rate on long-term gains is scheduled to revert to 20%) under current law. There is no doubt some revenue feedback will occur over the long-run from lower capital gains tax rates spurring investment, but most estimates would say that we are currently on the left side of the Laffer Curve with respect to capital gains. (That doesn't necessarily mean it should be increased, however, as that's a separate question. And whether it should or should not also depends upon dividend tax policy and labor tax policy as they too can affect capital gains behavior.)
But Obama didn't question this assumption made by Gibson. He seemed to be saying, "Okay Charlie, even if this is true, the rate should still be 28 percent." And that's a ludicrous statement too. Obama appeared to assume that even if we were indeed on the right side of the Laffer Curve (where revenues decrease from cutting tax rates, all else equal), he still doesn't want a free lunch. Any truly concerned liberal who favors increasing the size of government given such a situation would merely seek to find the rate that maximizes tax revenue, and then the progressivity issue could have been dealt with on the spending side by using that money to expand a social program (or a tax/spending program like EITC). Everyone would win (i.e. a free lunch), and we could "build our infrastructure, pay for everyone's health care, build our schools, (insert big government program here that sounds good to voters), and blah, blah, blah."
Last edited by zimmer; 01-02-10 at 11:35 PM.
I AM DEPLORABLE.
NEVER CRIMINAL HILLARY (S-NY)
It is pretty abhorrent. Wingnuts of the year article on the Daily Beast notes this comment by Rush, and compares it to conservatives of yore:
Rush Limbaugh: “I Hope He fails.”
When John Wayne, a committed conservative, was asked about JFK winning the 1960 election, he said, “I didn't vote for him, but he's my president, and I hope he does a good job.” Rush Limbaugh’s response to the 2008 election illustrated how far we’ve fallen: “I hope he fails.”
Wingnuts of the Year - The Daily Beast
Last edited by jackalope; 01-02-10 at 11:53 PM.
Tiki Bar! Woot!
Drinks are plenty, music is fine, and the company is first-rate