• 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!

Should the 2001/2003 GWB cuts be extended?

Should the 2001/2003 GWB tax cuts be extended for people that make under $250k?


  • Total voters
    55
You cut ****ing spending .......You don't have billion dollar socialist health plans for a frigging start..............You don't bail out banks and the car industry......Give me a break!!!!

All of that together did not create a fraction of our debt. Whereas the unfunded doubling of our military to a size almost equivalent to the rest of the world combined, two unfunded wars, unfunded tax cuts for the wealthy, and unfunded prescription card program, created trillions of debt.
 
Kinda like you right-wingers that love to bitch and moan about everything that is spent...but are the first to cry if something that affects you is cut. :doh

100% of the GOP voted against PAYGO ~ the bill that would not allow spending unless there was a way for paying for it.

They can talk the talk, but cannot walk the walk.
 
All of that together did not create a fraction of our debt. Whereas the unfunded doubling of our military to a size almost equivalent to the rest of the world combined, two unfunded wars, unfunded tax cuts for the wealthy, and unfunded prescription card program, created trillions of debt.

Our military has not been doubled..it hasn't even recovered from the cuts Clinton made in it.........

If you had your way we would be speaking arabic.........

Its funny how you didn't mention 9/11/01 or Katrina the biggest natural disaster that ever hit this country..........Your probably one of the ones that said Bush did not spend enough money on Katrina at the time because the people were black.............

HYPOCRITE
 
100% of the GOP voted against PAYGO ~ the bill that would not allow spending unless there was a way for paying for it.

They can talk the talk, but cannot walk the walk.[/QUOTE

Your ****ing daddy Obama said there would be no earmarks on the budget he sunbmits during the campaign and their were hundreds of them on it.........He lies more the DD and I did not think that was possible.......
 
Our military has not been doubled..it hasn't even recovered from the cuts Clinton made in it.........

It was Dick Cheney that cut the military not Clinton.
 
so your for cutting entitlements that the old and military get right but you won't send back your Bush tax cut........what is wrong with this picture????:confused:

YOU are the one who wants everyone to have low taxes, but is unwilling to cut spending. *I* am perfectly willing to raise taxes on the wealthy, so that your ancient ass can leech off the government for a few more years until you croak. You're welcome. :2wave:
 
Last edited:
Your ****ing daddy Obama said there would be no earmarks on the budget he sunbmits during the campaign and their were hundreds of them on it.........He lies more the DD and I did not think that was possible.......

Okay, there seems to be no point in having any sort of intelligent conversation with you. You are far too radical in your ideas, and you act like a true hyper-partisan. Calm down dude, its not like any discussions on some random online forum actually matter. And yelling about it, and getting pissed off does nothing but harm you.
 
100% of the GOP voted against PAYGO ~ the bill that would not allow spending unless there was a way for paying for it.

They can talk the talk, but cannot walk the walk.[/QUOTE

Your ****ing daddy Obama said there would be no earmarks on the budget he sunbmits during the campaign and their were hundreds of them on it.........He lies more the DD and I did not think that was possible.......

Wrong Popeye, it was "your ****ing daddy" McCain, that made that claim. And the majority of voters decided not to elect him president.

"CNBC's Joe Kernen falsely claimed that President Obama "promised ... no more earmarks," while colleague Maria Bartiromo similarly asserted that "during the campaign, [Obama] said he would eliminate" earmarks. In fact, Obama promised to reform the earmark process and cut wasteful spending, not eliminate earmarks altogether."
CNBC's Kernen, Bartiromo falsely claimed Obama promised to eliminate earmarks | Media Matters for America
 
Last edited:
Our military has not been doubled..it hasn't even recovered from the cuts Clinton made in it.........

If you had your way we would be speaking arabic.........

Its funny how you didn't mention 9/11/01 or Katrina the biggest natural disaster that ever hit this country..........Your probably one of the ones that said Bush did not spend enough money on Katrina at the time because the people were black.............

HYPOCRITE
"In 2008, the United States will spend more than $600 billion on defense, including funding for the Iraq War. If Congress adds the remainder of what President George W. Bush has requested for Iraq and Afghanistan, spending will top $700 billion.

In constant dollars, the 2008 U.S. defense budget is higher than any year since World War II, and the United States now spends more on defense than everyone else in the world combined."
How much defense spending is enough? | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
 
It was Dick Cheney that cut the military not Clinton.

You clueless my left wing friend.......Your boy Slick Willie cut our active ships in half................you don't know..I do........Cheney was a big backer of our military, even you know that........
 
YOU are the one who wants everyone to have low taxes, but is unwilling to cut spending. *I* am perfectly willing to raise taxes on the wealthy, so that your ancient ass can leech off the government for a few more years until you croak. You're welcome. :2wave:

That is the only talking point you have is raise taxes on the wealthy...Don't you know they are the ones who pay the taxes in this country..........

Just remember one thing my whacked out left wing friend some day you will be old to and it comes faster then your socialist ass believes.......
 
Increase those taxes and you lose capital for investment and expansion of the private sector. Way to go, genius!


BTW - How would you pay down the deficit... genius?:2wave:

In 2003, 450 Economists including ten Nobel Prize Laureates made this statement:

Economic growth, though positive, has not been sufficient to generate jobs and prevent unemployment from rising. In fact, there are now more than two million fewer private sector jobs than at the start of the current recession. Overcapacity, corporate scandals, and uncertainty have and will continue to weigh down the economy.

The tax cut plan proposed by President Bush is not the answer to these problems. Regardless of how one views the specifics of the Bush plan, there is wide agreement that its purpose is a permanent change in the tax structure and not the creation of jobs and growth in the near-term. The permanent dividend tax cut, in particular, is not credible as a short-term stimulus. As tax reform, the dividend tax cut is misdirected in that it targets individuals rather than corporations, is overly complex, and could be, but is not, part of a revenue-neutral tax reform effort.

Passing these tax cuts will worsen the long-term budget outlook, adding to the nation’s projected chronic deficits. This fiscal deterioration will reduce the capacity of the government to finance Social Security and Medicare benefits as well as investments in schools, health, infrastructure, and basic research. Moreover, the proposed tax cuts will generate further inequalities in after-tax income.

To be effective, a stimulus plan should rely on immediate but temporary spending and tax measures to expand demand, and it should also rely on immediate but temporary incentives for investment. Such a stimulus plan would spur growth and jobs in the short term without exacerbating the long-term budget outlook.
 
Okay, there seems to be no point in having any sort of intelligent conversation with you. You are far too radical in your ideas, and you act like a true hyper-partisan. Calm down dude, its not like any discussions on some random online forum actually matter. And yelling about it, and getting pissed off does nothing but harm you.

:rofl Your the one who always attacks the messenger when your position is defenseless........tell me did Obama make a campaign promise to cut out ear marks in his campaign and then in his first budget approve hundrred of them

What a cop out some of you lefties are......at least DD will try and defend his position even though he is wrong............take a hike......don't respond to my posts anymore.If you can't stand the heat don't go in the kitchen..............
 
Last edited:
That is the only talking point you have is raise taxes on the wealthy...Don't you know they are the ones who pay the taxes in this country..........

Just remember one thing my whacked out left wing friend some day you will be old to and it comes faster then your socialist ass believes.......

I love how you call me a socialist while YOU attack ME for wanting to get entitlement spending under control. When you think of something to say that's more complex than a 10-second sound byte Glenn Beck fed to you, let me know. :2wave:
 
Last edited:
Whatever it takes to keep someone like you safe.............We always need a strong military...........

Our invasion and 7 year occupation of Iraq did nothing to make me safe, as Iraq was of no threat to the US, which has been confirmed by the Pentagon.

We need a strong defense, not a force to commit further imperialist acts of aggression in countries that never attacked us.

But then I guess waste in government spending is not very important to the GOP, except a election time when they wave it around as if they meant it.
 
I love how you call me a socialist while YOU attack ME for wanting to get entitlement spending under control. When you think of something to say that's more complex than a 10-second sound byte Glenn Beck fed to you, let me know. :2wave:

Do you know what the word entitlement means? It means giving something to someone they are entitled to......Why don't you bitch about your socialist medical plan that if approved will take one sixth of the budget.......How about cleaning up welfare and food stamps.....Why do you lefties love give away programs from cradle to grave?....Your boy Obama just raised the debt to a record amount to pay for his give away programs..Your buddy has been in office for a year and he has spent 3 times the amount Bush did and has spent more then the entire budges added together in the last 200 years.....

Why the **** is he worried about Gays in the military when we have 10% unemployment and the economy is in the tank.............When are you lefties going to wise up?
 
Your buddy has been in office for a year and he has spent 3 times the amount Bush did and has spent more then the entire budges added together in the last 200 years.....
?

I'll be the first to agree there is much waste in our spending that needs to be cut, but you are factually incorrect with your statement above.

"The current National Debt, as of Feb 7, 2010 is $12.3 trillion."

Federal Budget Spending and the National Debt

"When "W" left office on January 20, 2009, the national debt was $10,626,877,048,913.08.

The growth in the national debt during his eight years in office: $4,899,100,310,608.44."


"During much of Bush's tenure, he had a Republican majority in both the House and the Senate.

He claimed that tax cuts would pay for themselves - they did not. He claimed that tax cuts would result in growth - we are in the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

Let us hope that once the economy rights itself, we will find the political will to insist that we pay what it costs to run this country. We need to do it as a general principle of what is right for America, and not empty words conditioned upon every citizen agreeing with how every dollar in the government budget is being spent.


What George Bush did to this country profoundly weakened us. We worry about the effect of spending a trillion dollars to bring us back from an economic precipice because, during times of relative prosperity we were sold a bill of goods about how our budget would be balanced at some time in future, despite all evidence to the contrary.

There can be no more "magical thinking". No more tricks of accountancy. No more ignoring the costs of our aging population. This time, when we restore our economy to some semblance of health we need to pay as we go, not borrow as we cross our fingers."

Bush's two term increase in the national debt. | The Agonist
 
Do you know what the word entitlement means? It means giving something to someone they are entitled to......Why don't you bitch about your socialist medical plan that if approved will take one sixth of the budget.

I'm asking you which programs you are willing to cut to balance the budget. Not which possible future programs you might oppose ever going into existence.

Navy Pride said:
How about cleaning up welfare and food stamps.....Why do you lefties love give away programs from cradle to grave?

Welfare and food stamps are a drop in the bucket next to the federal deficit, and even suggesting them as a way to balance the budget shows that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Navy Pride said:
Your boy Obama just raised the debt to a record amount to pay for his give away programs..

Give away programs? Like those entitlements you refuse to give up?

Navy Pride said:
Why the **** is he worried about Gays in the military when we have 10% unemployment and the economy is in the tank.............When are you lefties going to wise up?

You just worry about your knitting, grandpa.
 
:rofl Your the one who always attacks the messenger when your position is defenseless........tell me did Obama make a campaign promise to cut out ear marks in his campaign and then in his first budget approve hundrred of them

What a cop out some of you lefties are......at least DD will try and defend his position even though he is wrong............take a hike......don't respond to my posts anymore.If you can't stand the heat don't go in the kitchen..............

As was pointed out before, he said to reduce, and work to eliminate. From what I can tell, the blame for the earmarks rests on the people who made the piece of legislation-all the "esteemed" men and women in the US Congress, from both sides of the aisle.

So I guess you give up then, good. Go waste someone else's time :2wave:
 
As was pointed out before, he said to reduce, and work to eliminate. From what I can tell, the blame for the earmarks rests on the people who made the piece of legislation-all the "esteemed" men and women in the US Congress, from both sides of the aisle.

So I guess you give up then, good. Go waste someone else's time :2wave:

Do you have any idea who signs the budget once congress aproves it????????????

I will give you 3 choices

a. SCOTUS
b. Barney Frank
c. The president
 
Last edited:
Do you have any idea who signs the budget once congress aproves it????????????

I will give you 3 choices

a. SCOTUS
b. Barney Frank
c. The president

Let me explain this to you as slowly, and simply as I can.

The President can only sign what Congress gives him to sign. And at the time, if he had vetoed it, and sent it back to Congress for a less earmarked version, you'd just be bashing him for not reacting fast enough, and passing a stim package the people of American needed.

Don't even waste my time denying that.
 
Let me explain this to you as slowly, and simply as I can.

The President can only sign what Congress gives him to sign. And at the time, if he had vetoed it, and sent it back to Congress for a less earmarked version, you'd just be bashing him for not reacting fast enough, and passing a stim package the people of American needed.

Don't even waste my time denying that.

Not in your wildest dreams my left wing friend.........78% of the American public diapproved of that health plan.......
 
Back
Top Bottom