• 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!

President Obama Approval Rating: Boost From Osama Bin Laden Death Likely

Like I said in the OP, don't crow about it. Bush got a similar boost when he got Saddam, and we all know that he went from there straight into the toilet. The American people may be behind Obama now, but in 2012 they will be asking "What have you done for me lately?".

Yep and will be asking like they are right now, "Where are the jobs," "Where is the reduction in deficit as promised?", "Where is the strong economic growth?", "Where did the trillion dollar TARP and Stimulus money go?"
As Clinton said, "It is the economy, Stupid!"
 
When Obama wants to help improve bank accounts and jobs, you far-righties scream: "Don't Tread on Me"... then when he takes out the terrorist the W. couldn't find after 8 years, you demand Obama get you a job and put free money in your bank account...

Make up your minds.

Where are the jobs? 14.76 Million unemployed and 2.6 million fewer people working today than in January 2009. You seem to be buying the Obama rhetoric and the question is, why?
 
Where are the jobs? 14.76 Million unemployed and 2.6 million fewer people working today than in January 2009. You seem to be buying the Obama rhetoric and the question is, why?

I don't know. We ahve those tax cuts still in place? Where are they creating jobs? :coffeepap
 
I don't know. We ahve those tax cuts still in place? Where are they creating jobs? :coffeepap

Right, Bush put tax cuts in place 10 years ago and those same cuts are in place now. How long between your last raise? Bush created jobs, Obama has lost jobs.
 
Right, Bush put tax cuts in place 10 years ago and those same cuts are in place now. How long between your last raise? Bush created jobs, Obama has lost jobs.

So, we hasve to continuely reduce taxes until business and the wealthy pay none at all? Is that really your position?
 
So, we hasve to continuely reduce taxes until business and the wealthy pay none at all? Is that really your position?

So the rich can fund the liberal spending appetite in your world? There isn't enough revenue available from the rich if you took it all to affect the debt.
 
That is true. What this does do, however, is take the "Democrats are soft on terrorism" argument away from the Republicans. That is permanently neutralized (and perhaps it has given the issue to the favor of the Dems, since the Republicans talked the talk but failed in the walk) barring a huge terrorism attack in the next 18 months....

Except that terrorist attacks almost always lead to a boost in the popularity of the leader... That's what bush did, he would talk (or his people would talk) about all sorts of terrorist threats at politically useful times.
 
So the rich can fund the liberal spending appetite in your world? There isn't enough revenue available from the rich if you took it all to affect the debt.

So, you don't want them to pay any taxes at all? Just working folk. I see.
 
there's not enough money in the solar system to make whole our big 3 federal social programs

if budget reform is not undertaken now, then social security, medicare and medicaid (as well as state pensions) simply will cease to exist in their present form

it's been two years since the party in power produced a budget

leadership, anyone?
 
mrz050911dAPR20110507114516.jpg
 
So, you don't want them to pay any taxes at all? Just working folk. I see.

You certainly have a problem with certain economic classes keeping more of what they earn. What do you think the rich should pay in taxes and why? I keep hearing about the rich paying their "fair share" so define fair share?
 
no matter what the rich pay it can't come close to making whole our big 3 federal social programs, nor our suffocating state pension systems

there's just not enough rich in the milky way

if social security, medicare and medicaid are not fudamentally restructured now, they will disappear in their current constructs

and two years farther down the road the party in power has STILL failed to itemize its answer

it is what it is---math

leadership, anyone?
 
no matter what the rich pay it can't come close to making whole our big 3 federal social programs, nor our suffocating state pension systems

there's just not enough rich in the milky way

if social security, medicare and medicaid are not fudamentally restructured now, they will disappear in their current constructs

and two years farther down the road the party in power has STILL failed to itemize its answer

it is what it is---math

leadership, anyone?

Notice how liberals never define what the fair share is for the rich? They know there isn't enough money from that so called "fair share" to generate the revenue required to fund their social spending so they just want the issue instead of offering numbers.
 
Notice how liberals never define what the fair share is for the rich? They know there isn't enough money from that so called "fair share" to generate the revenue required to fund their social spending so they just want the issue instead of offering numbers.
When Predisdent Reagan raised taxes on corporations he talked about "fair share." What did he mean by that?
 
When Predisdent Reagan raised taxes on corporations he talked about "fair share." What did he mean by that?

This isn't about Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton, or GW Bush, this is about your claim that the rich today aren't paying their fair share so what is that fair share? I don't recall Reagan ever using the phrase "fair share" but if he did I don't agree with it.
 
When Predisdent Reagan raised taxes on corporations he talked about "fair share." What did he mean by that?

The 'correct' quote is "everybody and every corporation pay their fair share". HE was NOT singling out corporations, as you would have us believe.

NEXT.

BTW, the clip you posted was from the signing speech for the Tax Reform Act.
http://www.sweetspeeches.com/s/1218-ronald-reagan-remarks-on-signing-the-tax-reform-act
It was primarily geared towards individuals, and designed to create a flatter tax system for said individuals. Corporations were barely mentioned.


EDIT:

BTW, you were one of the posters whining in here about videos edited to be false, misleading and manipulative :rofl:
 
Last edited:
their fair share?

you mean like ge?

whose superstar accountant went on bended knee to CHARLIE RANGEL to get that extension

and thereby (as well as by virtue of sending jobs offshore) ended up paying ZERO in 2011 taxes on 14.2B profits

GE Pays No Taxes - The Daily Beast

jobs czar, anyone?
 
I don't understand what liberals hope to achieve with this 'He did it too' line of argument in just about everything debated today. Obama is a weak stick to the point of NOT having the 'Change' that he campaigned on, and NO ONE questioned him on in '08.

If libs are holding out all these examples of past republican Presidents, saying that they took the right course of action, then doesn't that just destroy their own arguments, like how Bush ruined the economy?

j-mac
 
vote obama, 2012!

it's what's-his-name's fault!

leadership, anyone?
 
The 'correct' quote is "everybody and every corporation pay their fair share". HE was NOT singling out corporations, as you would have us believe.

NEXT.

BTW, the clip you posted was from the signing speech for the Tax Reform Act.
Ronald Reagan » Remarks on Signing the Tax Reform Act | Sweet Speeches
It was primarily geared towards individuals, and designed to create a flatter tax system for said individuals. Corporations were barely mentioned.

You are absolutely correct, in fact, Reagan cut taxes on the wealthy and cut corporate taxes in half.....while raising them on the middle and working class. I guess we all know too well what Reagan thought the "fair share" was.
 
I don't understand what liberals hope to achieve with this 'He did it too' line of argument in just about everything debated today. Obama is a weak stick to the point of NOT having the 'Change' that he campaigned on, and NO ONE questioned him on in '08.

If libs are holding out all these examples of past republican Presidents, saying that they took the right course of action, then doesn't that just destroy their own arguments, like how Bush ruined the economy?

j-mac

Didn't liberals claim that with Obama things would be different? Didn't they claim that Obama was going to solve the economic problems we were facing? Now they are claiming that Obama is just doing what Bush and Reagan did. Is that what liberals voted for?
 
You are absolutely correct, in fact, Reagan cut taxes on the wealthy and cut corporate taxes in half.....while raising them on the middle and working class. I guess we all know too well what Reagan thought the "fair share" was.

The first discusssion today needs to be why it is that 47% of Americans don't pay ANY taxes. That needs to change.

j-mac
 
You are absolutely correct, in fact, Reagan cut taxes on the wealthy and cut corporate taxes in half.....while raising them on the middle and working class. I guess we all know too well what Reagan thought the "fair share" was.

Please cite for me any evidence that Reagan raised Federal Income Taxes on the middle and working class? I am waiting for what that fair share is for the rich to pay and for some liberal to explain to me why keeping more of what a liberal earns isn't an expense to the govt. since allowing the rich to keep more of what they earn is?
 
Back
Top Bottom