• 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!

Focus on Petraeus and Taxes as Obama Faces Reporters

For example?

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama's budget proposal offers lawmakers a long list of cuts to reach spending levels both sides agreed to earlier, meeting a bipartisan goal for limiting spending but prompting howls of protest from interest groups.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204062704577221570918859962.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/14/u...aises-taxes-on-the-rich-to-spend-on-jobs.html

Obama budget to cut deficit by $1.1 trillion | Reuters

Just the first three links on a search.
 
Obama's brand of "making concessions" means everyone doing what he wants. Go read Woodward's book, it explains why we are where we are on the fiscal road.
 
WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama's budget proposal offers lawmakers a long list of cuts to reach spending levels both sides agreed to earlier, meeting a bipartisan goal for limiting spending but prompting howls of protest from interest groups.

Proposed Spending Cuts Trigger Complaints - WSJ.com

Military Cuts and Tax Plan Are Central to Budget Proposal - NYTimes.com

Obama budget to cut deficit by $1.1 trillion | Reuters

Just the first three links on a search.

Misleading. His budget increased spending, from 3.6 trillion to 5.8 trillion. Even the Republicans proposed increasing spending. No one is cutting.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/tables.pdf
 
WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama's budget proposal offers lawmakers a long list of cuts to reach spending levels both sides agreed to earlier, meeting a bipartisan goal for limiting spending but prompting howls of protest from interest groups.

Proposed Spending Cuts Trigger Complaints - WSJ.com

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/14/u...aises-taxes-on-the-rich-to-spend-on-jobs.html

Obama budget to cut deficit by $1.1 trillion | Reuters

Just the first three links on a search.

Article 1, and 3 the same, behind a pay wall. Article 2 states that Obama's proposal is to cut military funding and raise taxes on the rich, while increasing spending on other programs.

Article 2 is typical Obama. I'm going to save money by cutting things I don't like, just so I can spend it elsewhere that I do like, but hey, that's spending cuts!

If either side wants to be "real", freeze spending @ 2008 levels, and increase taxes by 10% across the board.
 
That sounds reasonable in theory, but it is not entirely true. We've actually been dialing back the help we give people in need and cutting taxes on the wealthy for sometime. Linked a Standford study for someone the other day that said the very movement is why we have more poor today, hurting us in all kinds of ways. So, if that study is accurate, it would be more the breaks we've given the wealthy, and that the poor have been taking it n the chin for awhile.

Again you ignore what I said, has it been only the top 5% that pays nearly 60% of all taxes, that are responsible for putting us 16 trillion dollars in debt ?? A simple yes or no ..

Seeing we spend about 450 billion a year in welfare, in my opinion that answer is no. If that is true, then again I’ll ask .. Why should those that help put us 16 trillion dollars in debt not help us get out of it ?

If we can raise the taxes on those top 5%, to help get us out of our debt problem, what is wrong with raising the taxes on the middle class that were also cut.

Now one of your arguments is that people in the upper incomes did pretty well during Clintons years, but didn’t the middle class do pretty well also?

Seeing this debt is America’s problem, shouldn’t everyone be expected to help take care of it? I’ve often heard liberals like yourself bragging about the Clinton years …. So here is your chance to go back to them. For everyone not just 1 in 20
 
Again you ignore what I said, has it been only the top 5% that pays nearly 60% of all taxes, that are responsible for putting us 16 trillion dollars in debt ?? A simple yes or no ..

Seeing we spend about 450 billion a year in welfare, in my opinion that answer is no. If that is true, then again I’ll ask .. Why should those that help put us 16 trillion dollars in debt not help us get out of it ?

If we can raise the taxes on those top 5%, to help get us out of our debt problem, what is wrong with raising the taxes on the middle class that were also cut.

Now one of your arguments is that people in the upper incomes did pretty well during Clintons years, but didn’t the middle class do pretty well also?

Seeing this debt is America’s problem, shouldn’t everyone be expected to help take care of it? I’ve often heard liberals like yourself bragging about the Clinton years …. So here is your chance to go back to them. For everyone not just 1 in 20

I'm not ignoring it. I'm telling you why. Because we cut their burden, and cut the help we give people, more fell below that line. Taking more out of the taxing population. Cause and effect.

This puts more people on welfare, but with less services to move them out. We've done it your way, and for a long time now. This is the result.
 
Thats not the point. We're debating whether Obamas words contradict.

No, we're debating whether one sentence of one speech on one day is all that there is on the subject. There has been some give and take all along. Obama has agreed in principle to increases and taxes and spending cuts. Republicans tea party folks have largely insisted on no tax increases and democrats largely no cuts. Seems to me Obama is less the problem here than the two parties.

However, you're too narrow in criticism and incorrectly label the speech as something it really isn't.
 
No, we're debating whether one sentence of one speech on one day is all that there is on the subject. There has been some give and take all along. Obama has agreed in principle to increases and taxes and spending cuts. Republicans tea party folks have largely insisted on no tax increases and democrats largely no cuts. Seems to me Obama is less the problem here than the two parties.

However, you're too narrow in criticism and incorrectly label the speech as something it really isn't.

No, were debating the topic I posted in the OP, which was Obamas press conference about the fiscal cliff. In which he literaly said 'here are your two options'. If you want to compare it to his past speeches, then the contrast is even more apparent. He is not interested in compromise or new ideas. His only goal is to extend the tax cuts for those under 250k before he will do anything else. That is what he said.
 
You do understand that the election results dealt every major player a different hand of cards don't you?

No, I understand that your claim the GOP is out of touch with voters on economic matters has no factual evidence behind it.
 
No, I understand that your claim the GOP is out of touch with voters on economic matters has no factual evidence behind it.

FACTUAL EVIDENCE: Obama campaigned on raising taxes on the rich while Romney campaigned on NOT raisign them. Obama won - Romney lost.

Please see the election results from a week ago for factual evidence of those results. Also see the CNN exit polling on public support for tax increases for the rich.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83429.html
 
Last edited:
FACTUAL EVIDENCE: Obama campaigned on raising taxes on the rich while Romney campaigned on NOT raisign them. Obama won - Romney lost.

Please see the election results from a week ago for factual evidence of those results. Also see the CNN exit polling on public support for tax increases for the rich.

Exit polls 2012: Most say hike taxes - Emily Schultheis - POLITICO.com

The great thing about polls is you can always find one to say what you want.

Gallup Fiscal Cliff Poll: Republicans Could Win On Taxes - Business Insider

And they are not factual evidence to me. Just like assuming Obama won because he was in touch with voters on economic matters is not factual evidence. C does not neccesarily indicate A

2012 Exit Polls: Why They Won't Tell You Who Won
 
But it clearly was an issue in the presidential campaign and the candidate who won clearly supported raising taxes on the rich. The candidate who opposed it lost.
 
No, were debating the topic I posted in the OP, which was Obamas press conference about the fiscal cliff. In which he literaly said 'here are your two options'. If you want to compare it to his past speeches, then the contrast is even more apparent. He is not interested in compromise or new ideas. His only goal is to extend the tax cuts for those under 250k before he will do anything else. That is what he said.

Your reading is a dishonest reading. Nothing is in a vacuum absent any context or history. Sorry.
 
But it clearly was an issue in the presidential campaign and the candidate who won clearly supported raising taxes on the rich. The candidate who opposed it lost.

And logically those things are not necessarily connected. But again, the topic is what Obama said in his press conference.
 
Your reading is a dishonest reading. Nothing is in a vacuum absent any context or history. Sorry.

Your defense is a dishonest one. Has Obama simply said "im open to new ideas, we can either extend everything, extend what I want, or come up with a third option" you might have a point. But he reiterated that there are only two options, and that anything but raising taxes on the rich is unacceptable.

"there are two pathways available"

Option one, if Congress fails to act by the end of this year, everybody’s taxes will automatically go up, including the 98 percent of Americans who make less than $250,000 a year and the 97 percent of small businesses who earn less than $250,000 a year. That doesn’t make sense. Our economy can’t afford that right now. Certainly no middle-class family can afford that right now.

The other option is to pass a law right now that would prevent any tax hike whatsoever on the first $250,000 of everybody’s income. And by the way, that means every American, including the wealthiest Americans, get a tax cut. It means that 98 percent of all Americans and 97 percent of all small businesses won’t see their taxes go up a single dime.

The Senate has already passed a law like this. Democrats in the House are ready to pass a law like this. And I hope Republicans in the House come on board too. We should not hold the middle class hostage while we debate tax cuts for the wealthy. We should at least do what we agree on, and that’s to keep middle-class taxes lower. And I’ll bring everyone in to sign it right away so we can give folks some certainty before the holiday season.

And of course he has to call Republicans terrorists too. That doesnt sound very nice.
 
And he already said much the same thing a couple days earlier

Already, I’ve put forward a detailed plan that allows us to make these investments while reducing our deficit by $4 trillion over the next decade. Now, I’m open to compromise and new ideas. But I refuse to accept any approach that isn’t balanced. I will not ask students or seniors or middle-class families to pay down the entire deficit while people making over $250,000 aren’t asked to pay a dime more in taxes. This was a central question in the election. And on Tuesday, we found out that the majority of Americans agree with my approach – that includes Democrats, Independents, and Republicans.

Now we need a majority in Congress to listen – and they should start by making sure taxes don’t go up on the 98% of Americans making under $250,000 a year starting January 1. This is something we all agree on. Even as we negotiate a broader deficit reduction package, Congress should extend middle-class tax cuts right now. It’s a step that would give millions of families and 97% of small businesses the peace of mind that will lead to new jobs and faster growth. There’s no reason to wait.

He like to start by acting like hes going to listen and compromise, and then he lays down the law.
 
Your defense is a dishonest one. Has Obama simply said "im open to new ideas, we can either extend everything, extend what I want, or come up with a third option" you might have a point. But he reiterated that there are only two options, and that anything but raising taxes on the rich is unacceptable.

"there are two pathways available"





And of course he has to call Republicans terrorists too. That doesnt sound very nice.

You're missing badly. There is a context, a history. And if you read the NYT today, you'll find both sides think an agreement can be reached. Never pretend that a single sentence or even speech stands absolutely alone.
 
WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama's budget proposal offers lawmakers a long list of cuts to reach spending levels both sides agreed to earlier, meeting a bipartisan goal for limiting spending but prompting howls of protest from interest groups.

Proposed Spending Cuts Trigger Complaints - WSJ.com

Military Cuts and Tax Plan Are Central to Budget Proposal - NYTimes.com

Obama budget to cut deficit by $1.1 trillion | Reuters

Just the first three links on a search.

Poor Obama certainly didn't get his dregree in economics.

He wants to cut the deficit by $1.1 trillion over 10 years, while piling on the debt that much every year during his first term.

I'm constantly amazed that there are still so many people out there who can do regular things like reading and writing yet still believe this guy.

It would probably be best for the country to just give Barack Obama carte blanche to do anything he wants for the next four years so that in the generations to come children everywhere will learn in schools and history books about the very bad decisions the American people of today made, and that they must never do that again,
 
Poor Obama certainly didn't get his dregree in economics.

He wants to cut the deficit by $1.1 trillion over 10 years, while piling on the debt that much every year during his first term.

I'm constantly amazed that there are still so many people out there who can do regular things like reading and writing yet still believe this guy.

It would probably be best for the country to just give Barack Obama carte blanche to do anything he wants for the next four years so that in the generations to come children everywhere will learn in schools and history books about the very bad decisions the American people of today made, and that they must never do that again,

Well no one has impressed with the brilliance of their plans. But partisanship aside, at least he knows enough to suggest a balanced approach.
 
And logically those things are not necessarily connected. But again, the topic is what Obama said in his press conference.

Perhaps to those who were not following the campaign.
 
Back
Top Bottom