• 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!

White House won't accept new tax offer from Republican leader

In a country where everyone is supposed to be equal, you can not penalize one group more than others just because of the size of their bank account.

"that all men are created equal" is perhaps the most misunderstood and most abused concept in our society and government. It is not even in the Constitution, but in the Declaration of Independence.

The Declaration of Independence is not a governing document, or at least it was not intended to be. It was explaining to England that we, at least those supporting it, were revolting against England and why we were doing it.

I believe the meaning is fairly simple. England had a class society based upon heredity. It says that there is no Noble class that naturally exists giving one person rights over another simply by dint of Birth, but rather that all people should be treated equally under the law and have the same rights at birth.

We know, beyond any doubt that not every person is born equal to any other person except that law should be applied to each and every individual equally. Each and every person has innate intelligence, personality, drive, interests and talents, among other things. Some are born into poverty and some into wealth. The authors of the Declaration knew that there was no way that each and every person would "equal" in all things, it is impossible. However, they believed that government and law should be applied to each and every person no matter what station in life they are born to or what level they rise to.

Throughout our history, this one statement has been applied in many different ways. Some good, some bad. It's application to our education system has been particularly stellar in gutting the effectiveness of that education system. It has been used to demand that all children have access to and be taught the same as every other child without taking in account natural intelligence and abilities. It has been demanded that monies be spent on all children equally despite differing needs and variations between individual children and the cost of giving each child the best education possible.

It has been used to justify welfare and other entitlement programs, after all, if all people are created equal, shouldn't they all have a basic standard of living, regardless of their own efforts to achieve it? Shouldn't all people be given equal opportunities? If the true concept of all people being equal was actually applied to these types of laws, then many of our existing laws would not exist as they only apply to some, not all of the people. If Welfare was applied using the real meaning of this phrase then every person in the US would receive the same welfare check, regardless of their current economic status. That would be equally applying the law. Affirmative action would not exist since it only applies to some, it uses race, color, sex and other factors to give greater advantage to some over others. If the law treats them all equally, regardless of those factors, the it would have the same affect for everyone, not just some.

While some use this phrase to mean many different things, it is clear that the one thing they do not want to apply it to is Taxes. If government is required, as some believe, to treat all citizens equal under the law, then the same, equal tax rate would apply to all citizens.
 
This is the problem, the people or at least a slight majority of them that showed out do indeed think like this and not rationally, or with any historical knowledge. For example, read through the exchange above between DV, and Boo...Progressives like Boo don't use "democracy" in the sense that our founders envisioned in our constitution, but rather in some warped vision where this country is overseen by quasi dictators, and measures that put them in office are direct democracy...Iran has this sort of system that they want, and how does that work? Corrupt votes that give Ahminajihad 97% of the the vote (yeah right) or Venezuela that does the same for Chavez? Where is the opportunity in those places? Their equality of outcome is impossible in a free society, so their vision for America naturally needs to make us less free.

And the sad part is at least one of those people teaches our kids with our permission.
Damn, you whine about being insulted, and you misread me that badly? Not sure how to address such ignorance civilly. :coffeepap
 
"that all men are created equal" is perhaps the most misunderstood and most abused concept in our society and government. It is not even in the Constitution, but in the Declaration of Independence.

The Declaration of Independence is not a governing document, or at least it was not intended to be. It was explaining to England that we, at least those supporting it, were revolting against England and why we were doing it.

I believe the meaning is fairly simple. England had a class society based upon heredity. It says that there is no Noble class that naturally exists giving one person rights over another simply by dint of Birth, but rather that all people should be treated equally under the law and have the same rights at birth.

We know, beyond any doubt that not every person is born equal to any other person except that law should be applied to each and every individual equally. Each and every person has innate intelligence, personality, drive, interests and talents, among other things. Some are born into poverty and some into wealth. The authors of the Declaration knew that there was no way that each and every person would "equal" in all things, it is impossible. However, they believed that government and law should be applied to each and every person no matter what station in life they are born to or what level they rise to.

Throughout our history, this one statement has been applied in many different ways. Some good, some bad. It's application to our education system has been particularly stellar in gutting the effectiveness of that education system. It has been used to demand that all children have access to and be taught the same as every other child without taking in account natural intelligence and abilities. It has been demanded that monies be spent on all children equally despite differing needs and variations between individual children and the cost of giving each child the best education possible.

It has been used to justify welfare and other entitlement programs, after all, if all people are created equal, shouldn't they all have a basic standard of living, regardless of their own efforts to achieve it? Shouldn't all people be given equal opportunities? If the true concept of all people being equal was actually applied to these types of laws, then many of our existing laws would not exist as they only apply to some, not all of the people. If Welfare was applied using the real meaning of this phrase then every person in the US would receive the same welfare check, regardless of their current economic status. That would be equally applying the law. Affirmative action would not exist since it only applies to some, it uses race, color, sex and other factors to give greater advantage to some over others. If the law treats them all equally, regardless of those factors, the it would have the same affect for everyone, not just some.

While some use this phrase to mean many different things, it is clear that the one thing they do not want to apply it to is Taxes. If government is required, as some believe, to treat all citizens equal under the law, then the same, equal tax rate would apply to all citizens.

I am very aware of where the phrase originates from, but we are speaking legally...and under the law, Justice is blind based on the merits of the case not the persons race, religion, gender or bank account.

And NO, people should not have the same basic standard of living...if they WANT the same or better than what they have, they need to EARN IT. In order for it to be GIVEN to one person someone else must be penalized unfairly to generate the revenue needed to GIVE that person what they have not earned.

The tax system SHOULD be the same % rate whether or not you earn $20K or $200K a year....X % rate amount of $200K certainly is more than the same X % rate amount of $20K.

Unfortunately our government doesnt really care about doing whats right...or even lawful ....or even whats not within its powers to do but does any way.
 
This crap out of the Obama lying White House is such Bull **** it is inexcusable. Obama tells you that it is Boehner and repubs holding up the talks because they won't give in to demo demands, yet when repubs do indeed cave, and ask that entitlement reform be tied to the plan Obama balks....

We are negotiating with ourselves people. Obama has NO sign that he is willing to negotiate in good faith at all, it is his way or the highway....I say pass a tax cut on the three bottom tax tiers, and keep the top two the same, pass it in the house, dump it on Reid's desk, and go home.

Obama is a narcissistic puke... Obama wants to make the demands, Obama wants to clap his hands and say "jump" while his minions in congress say "how high." Obama isn't interested in having his own damn deal presented to him by republicans, he wants to present the same damn deal to republicans and have them "jump." To Obama this is a game - a power game.

I don't even understand how this idiot Obama has any congressional support whatsoever.

This is almost a themed "Pawn Stars" version of "Empire Strikes Back."
 
Obama needs to stand firm. He has the right approach and has the backing of the majority of Americans. Obama was too eager to try to appease the Republicans in his first term and as a result they stymied every effort he made at moving this country forward. Hopefully he has learned. Republicans are protecting the super wealthy off the backs of the working and middle class. They are willing to hold the working/middle class hostage to get breaks for the wealthiest of Americans. Americans see this and Republicans will pay the price politically if they don't change. Obama should hold firm and let Republicans make their own bed.
 
Damn, you whine about being insulted, and you misread me that badly? Not sure how to address such ignorance civilly. :coffeepap


No, I don't think I do Joe...I've know you through your writings for nearly 10 years now, or longer, and if nothing else you are at least consistent in your lean, as much as you like to play word games, and semantics it doesn't hide the fact that your lean is left to far left on the spectrum.

So if I don't have it right Joe, why don't you lay it out in plain clear language that everyone can easily understand? You won't.

So, what ever dude, you do what you want, but being 'uncivil' is par for the course when progressives are outed, so take your best shot.....
 
I am very aware of where the phrase originates from, but we are speaking legally...and under the law, Justice is blind based on the merits of the case not the persons race, religion, gender or bank account.

And NO, people should not have the same basic standard of living...if they WANT the same or better than what they have, they need to EARN IT. In order for it to be GIVEN to one person someone else must be penalized unfairly to generate the revenue needed to GIVE that person what they have not earned.

The tax system SHOULD be the same % rate whether or not you earn $20K or $200K a year....X % rate amount of $200K certainly is more than the same X % rate amount of $20K.

Unfortunately our government doesnt really care about doing whats right...or even lawful ....or even whats not within its powers to do but does any way.

Sorry if I was not clear. My intent was to support your statement, not argue against it.
 
No, I don't think I do Joe...I've know you through your writings for nearly 10 years now, or longer, and if nothing else you are at least consistent in your lean, as much as you like to play word games, and semantics it doesn't hide the fact that your lean is left to far left on the spectrum.

So if I don't have it right Joe, why don't you lay it out in plain clear language that everyone can easily understand? You won't.

So, what ever dude, you do what you want, but being 'uncivil' is par for the course when progressives are outed, so take your best shot.....

Being left of center is not equal to what you said. You misread often, get it wrong, weakly blame it on semantics, but the truth is you blind yourself with "leftist" speak, arguing stereotypes and not what is actually before you. I've spent this ten or so years trying to get you to see the difference.
 
Libs love to call the GOP the "party of no", yet Reid won't even vote on Boehner's proposal. Instead, he's sent the Senate away for the holidays.

Truth is, Obama very much wants to go over the "cliff", so he can later call it a tax cut when he extends the rates for the sub-$250K crowd.

How is it a "tax cut" when the rates are the same?
 
Obama needs to stand firm. He has the right approach....

Division, Class Warfare, propaganda, and outright lies....Great approach.

...and has the backing of the majority of Americans.

On that I will give you that....Obama was re elected, and has the leverage in this. Some in the Republican party need to learn that.

Obama was too eager to try to appease the Republicans in his first term and as a result they stymied every effort he made at moving this country forward.

Just not true. Look, Demo's had control of all three branches of legislative power in DC from 2008 when he got elected, to 2010 when the american people elected a majority in the house to repubs explicitly to place a check on the demo dream train that was running down the tracks unabated.

Hopefully he has learned.

Learned what? by pass congress? do more against the will of the people through the bureaucratic machine? I think you're going to see a real attempt to do just that, but he'd better be careful, you can only stave off scandals, and overstep your authority for so long.

Republicans are protecting the super wealthy off the backs of the working and middle class.

That's nonsense talking point communist propaganda.

They are willing to hold the working/middle class hostage to get breaks for the wealthiest of Americans.

Again, equally nonsense. If this were true then why'd Boehner come out with the raise in revenue of $800 billion straight out of the gate? Obama has had the luxury of not having to negotiate anything because Boehner is doing fine damage negotiating with himself very effectively.

Americans see this and Republicans will pay the price politically if they don't change.

I got news for ya, ultimately it is the President that shoulders the blame when recessions occur. No one remembers who the speaker was during the depression, but they do remember who was President.

Obama should hold firm and let Republicans make their own bed.

What are you talking about? Demo's like you are going to blame repubs, and Bush for everything including the rain as long as you think you can get away with it...Repubs should tell him to talk to the hand.
 
Being left of center is not equal to what you said. You misread often, get it wrong, weakly blame it on semantics, but the truth is you blind yourself with "leftist" speak, arguing stereotypes and not what is actually before you. I've spent this ten or so years trying to get you to see the difference.


Jesus, even that is just not honest. Can't you do the simplest of requests without having to drag it out over ten posts? I'm done with ya on this...
 
Last edited:
Jesus, even that is just not honest.

Bull ****. No you really have to tell yourself this silliness?

Anyway, you care to address anything I actually said, feel free.
 
Bull ****. No you really have to tell yourself this silliness?

Anyway, you care to address anything I actually said, feel free.


In the words of one of your hero's Former congressperson Barney Frank....Sir, arguing with you is like debating a kitchen table, It is pointless.
 
In the words of one of your hero's Former congressperson Barney Frank....Sir, arguing with you is like debating a kitchen table, It is pointless.

How would you know? You've even comment how well my discussions go with those who do so reasonably. You might try it someday. :coffeepap
 
In the words of one of your hero's Former congressperson Barney Frank....Sir, arguing with you is like debating a kitchen table, It is pointless.

Or another old saying, "Who is the biggest fool, the fool or the person that argues with him?"
 
Or another old saying, "Who is the biggest fool, the fool or the person that argues with him?"


Well you do have a point there....I am after a long time beginning to wonder why I give Joe the time of day.
 
Back
Top Bottom