The Republican Party

gimmesometruth27 · December 2010

unsung wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Newch91 wrote:

Thank you for this. It really is 100% obvious that Republicans are only looking after "the American people"...those American people in their case is the 2% wealthy in America.

it is amazing to me how many middle and lower class and even outright poor people repeatedly and faithfully vote for these people that do not care about them and do nothing that has their interests at the forefront...

Tell me why I should vote for a Democrat, because I can give you many reasons why I won't.

that is your decision to make. my posts on this forum have given you plenty of reasons to NOT vote republican. aren't you an "independent" anyway?

by the way, what are your thoughts on this?
posting.php?mode=quote&f=13&p=3328198

gimmesometruth27 · December 2010

Electric_Delta wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

Tax cuts for all helps all. How do people not see that? It's crazy to treat people differently based upon how much they earn.

If I were in the house, I would have voted for the bill still, but I can see why they the voted against it. It's not because they don't want the "poor" to get a tax break, it's because they want everyone to and they think this is the only way to get the Dem to have that debate and vote through tax cuts for all.

trickle down economics never worked ... people don't see it because it doesn't work ...

Well, trickle-up poverty isn't working so well, either.

trickle up poverty? lol that is good. where is trickle up poverty an economic strategy? i don't see anyone involved with the fed or any other economics advocating this? do you really think taxing 2% at a little higher rate is "trickle up poverty"??

as if warren buffett and bill gates will ever see the inside of one of the homes in harlem or the houseing projects of chicago, or get food from a homeless shelter...

Electric_Delta · December 2010

polaris_x wrote:

Electric_Delta wrote:

Well, trickle-up poverty isn't working so well, either.

i've never heard of that ...

in any case - the people define the kind of nation they want to be ... the US has always been an individualistic nation so the income gaps are not surprising and has been perpetuated by both sides of the establishment (dems/repubs) ...

countries that have smaller gaps tend to have higher taxation and invest in social services such as education ... i'm not sure why anyone would argue against this reality ... and why anyone would say the republicans aren't for the rich ... it's an obvious fact ... and is only an issue if you believe in some myth that republicans are concerned about everyone ...

If you think the Democrats care about the people, you're fooling yourself. They've passed several pieces of grossly unpopular legislation, defying the will of the people, defying the Constitution.

But then again, I guess they know what's better for me than I do, right?

Electric_Delta · December 2010

Well, trickle-up poverty isn't working so well, either.[/quote]
trickle up poverty? lol that is good. where is trickle up poverty an economic strategy? i don't see anyone involved with the fed or any other economics advocating this? do you really think taxing 2% at a little higher rate is "trickle up poverty"??

as is warren buffett and bill gates will ever see the inside of one of the homes in harlem or the houseing projects of chicago, or get food from a homeless shelter...[/quote]

Yeah, it's Nancy Pelosi's economic strategy. "Redistribute" to those who rely on entitlements by stealing from those who make a living.

gimmesometruth27 · December 2010

Electric_Delta wrote:

Well, trickle-up poverty isn't working so well, either.

trickle up poverty? lol that is good. where is trickle up poverty an economic strategy? i don't see anyone involved with the fed or any other economics advocating this? do you really think taxing 2% at a little higher rate is "trickle up poverty"??

as is warren buffett and bill gates will ever see the inside of one of the homes in harlem or the houseing projects of chicago, or get food from a homeless shelter...[/quote]

Yeah, it's Nancy Pelosi's economic strategy. "Redistribute" to those who rely on entitlements by stealing from those who make a living.[/quote]
wow, you should work at fox news...

Electric_Delta · December 2010

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Electric_Delta wrote:

Well, trickle-up poverty isn't working so well, either.

trickle up poverty? lol that is good. where is trickle up poverty an economic strategy? i don't see anyone involved with the fed or any other economics advocating this? do you really think taxing 2% at a little higher rate is "trickle up poverty"??

as is warren buffett and bill gates will ever see the inside of one of the homes in harlem or the houseing projects of chicago, or get food from a homeless shelter...

Yeah, it's Nancy Pelosi's economic strategy. "Redistribute" to those who rely on entitlements by stealing from those who make a living.[/quote]
wow, you should work at fox news...[/quote]

Facts are facts.

gimmesometruth27 · December 2010

Electric_Delta wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Electric_Delta wrote:

Well, trickle-up poverty isn't working so well, either.

trickle up poverty? lol that is good. where is trickle up poverty an economic strategy? i don't see anyone involved with the fed or any other economics advocating this? do you really think taxing 2% at a little higher rate is "trickle up poverty"??

as is warren buffett and bill gates will ever see the inside of one of the homes in harlem or the houseing projects of chicago, or get food from a homeless shelter...

Yeah, it's Nancy Pelosi's economic strategy. "Redistribute" to those who rely on entitlements by stealing from those who make a living.

wow, you should work at fox news...[/quote]
Facts are facts.[/quote]

nothing in any of your posts in this thread have been "factual". have you got any facts and figures or any links to back your contention on "trickle up poverty"? is sounds like something boehner, cantor, mcconnell, or rush or beck or bachmann would say...really, i am asking because i want to read about it.

you are using buzzwords like "redistribute", and "trickle up poverty" which is very dramatic by the way" and even using "pelosi" in a negative way to try to instill fear. i'm not buying it.

Electric_Delta · December 2010

nothing in any of your posts in this thread have been "factual". have you got any facts and figures or any links to back your contention on "trickle up poverty"? is sounds like something boehner, cantor, mcconnell, or rush or beck or bachmann would say...really, i am asking because i want to read about it.

you are using buzzwords like "redistribute", and "trickle up poverty" which is very dramatic by the way" and even using "pelosi" in a negative way to try to instill fear. i'm not buying it.[/quote]

Facts, figures, or links? Seriously?

Do you have any idea what the economic policies of this administration are going to do this country long term? We will end up being another Greece. As it stands, .40 of every dollar is borrowed. We will reach a point where stagnation, rampant unemployment, and super high interest rates will drag us into the doldrums even further.

How are we supposed to get out of this? The Dems seem to think spending trillions of dollars more will fix the problem, but ultimately, they don't want the problem fixed. The Obama agenda is, and always has been, to undermine our way of living. He has nothing but contempt for this nation and this people.

The fact is, we must stop spending or there will be no way out of this mess. What's so hard about that?

gimmesometruth27 · December 2010

Electric_Delta wrote:

nothing in any of your posts in this thread have been "factual". have you got any facts and figures or any links to back your contention on "trickle up poverty"? is sounds like something boehner, cantor, mcconnell, or rush or beck or bachmann would say...really, i am asking because i want to read about it.

you are using buzzwords like "redistribute", and "trickle up poverty" which is very dramatic by the way" and even using "pelosi" in a negative way to try to instill fear. i'm not buying it.

Facts, figures, or links? Seriously?

Do you have any idea what the economic policies of this administration are going to do this country long term? We will end up being another Greece. As it stands, .40 of every dollar is borrowed. We will reach a point where stagnation, rampant unemployment, and super high interest rates will drag us into the doldrums even further.

How are we supposed to get out of this? The Dems seem to think spending trillions of dollars more will fix the problem, but ultimately, they don't want the problem fixed. The Obama agenda is, and always has been, to undermine our way of living. He has nothing but contempt for this nation and this people.

The fact is, we must stop spending or there will be no way out of this mess. What's so hard about that?[/quote]

we can start by getting the fuck out of iraq and afghanistan and cutting the pentagon, homeland security, and military budgets...but all of those are sacred cows, the people in power on your side want to cut medicare, medicaid, unemployment, and welfare. does it strike you are utterly sad that we can not afford these programs to help the american citizens in tough times, but when the army needs another dozen tanks and humvees, and the air force needs another squadron of f-22s the money is always there to be had??

Jason P · December 2010

Maybe my thinking is way off on this issue, but the debate seems to be on secondary issues, not the actual tax increase itself. The left claim this will help redistribute wealth and the right claim it will hurt small business.

The only thing that is fact is that the government is trying to take more of it's citizens money . . . that is the only thing that is certain. After that, the money could be spent on F-22 Raptors or it could be spent on a new overpass in Nebraska. Who knows?

Let's keep our eyes on the ball and stay focused. The government is proposing to take more money from its citizens.

Sludge Factory · December 2010

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

we can start by getting the fuck out of iraq and afghanistan and cutting the pentagon, homeland security, and military budgets...but all of those are sacred cows, the people in power on your side want to cut medicare, medicaid, unemployment, and welfare. does it strike you are utterly sad that we can not afford these programs to help the american citizens in tough times, but when the army needs another dozen tanks and humvees, and the air force needs another squadron of f-22s the money is always there to be had??

I agree with your ideas on cutting spending here, but the thing I don't get is it is BOTH Republicans and Democrats that will not cut that type of spending. Not sure why all of the blame is lumped on the Republicans for this. Partisan politics has us all fucked.

gimmesometruth27 · December 2010

this thread is not just about taxes.

gimmesometruth27 · December 2010

Sludge Factory wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

we can start by getting the fuck out of iraq and afghanistan and cutting the pentagon, homeland security, and military budgets...but all of those are sacred cows, the people in power on your side want to cut medicare, medicaid, unemployment, and welfare. does it strike you are utterly sad that we can not afford these programs to help the american citizens in tough times, but when the army needs another dozen tanks and humvees, and the air force needs another squadron of f-22s the money is always there to be had??

I agree with your ideas on cutting spending here, but the thing I don't get is it is BOTH Republicans and Democrats that will not cut that type of spending. Not sure why all of the blame is lumped on the Republicans for this. Partisan politics has us all fucked.

because the dems have tried to draw down. they can not go in and say "we are cutting all of this military spending" because the republicans, like little children, will pile on and say that "the dems hate america" and that "the dems are soft on terrorism" or whatever slogan they will roll out when the time comes. budget bills have to have bipartisan support. how can anything change when one side refuses to even negotiate? the republicans have used every procedural trick in the book and refused to negotiate or outright blocked debate and votes on nearly every debate this session. you can not tell me that that is a good thing and that it is not the republicans who have crippled the congress.

Jason P · December 2010

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

this thread is not just about taxes.

The thread isn't, but the recent discussion has been about taxes. My point was that the only thing that is certain is that either the entire populous or 10 million people are going to pay more money to the government if a compromise is not reached. And it seems as though when the tax issue is debated, other things like education, abortion, small business, and other hot-topic issues get thrown around instead of focusing on our government trying to take more money from us.

polaris_x · December 2010

Electric_Delta wrote:

If you think the Democrats care about the people, you're fooling yourself. They've passed several pieces of grossly unpopular legislation, defying the will of the people, defying the Constitution.

But then again, I guess they know what's better for me than I do, right?

you did read the part where i said ... both sides of the political establishment has led to this right?

gimmesometruth27 · December 2010

Jason P wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

this thread is not just about taxes.

The thread isn't, but the recent discussion has been about taxes. My point was that the only thing that is certain is that either the entire populous or 10 million people are going to pay more money to the government if a compromise is not reached. And it seems as though when the tax issue is debated, other things like education, abortion, small business, and other hot-topic issues get thrown around instead of focusing on our government trying to take more money from us.

you view it as "taking money away from us". i view it as "paying into the system". there is a big difference there. as a citizen of this country it is my duty to pay taxes. it is your duty as well.

here is an idea, why not just do away with taxes? it seems that some people in this country are advocating that.

Sludge Factory · December 2010

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Sludge Factory wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

we can start by getting the fuck out of iraq and afghanistan and cutting the pentagon, homeland security, and military budgets...but all of those are sacred cows, the people in power on your side want to cut medicare, medicaid, unemployment, and welfare. does it strike you are utterly sad that we can not afford these programs to help the american citizens in tough times, but when the army needs another dozen tanks and humvees, and the air force needs another squadron of f-22s the money is always there to be had??

I agree with your ideas on cutting spending here, but the thing I don't get is it is BOTH Republicans and Democrats that will not cut that type of spending. Not sure why all of the blame is lumped on the Republicans for this. Partisan politics has us all fucked.

because the dems have tried to draw down. they can not go in and say "we are cutting all of this military spending" because the republicans, like little children, will pile on and say that "the dems hate america" and that "the dems are soft on terrorism" or whatever slogan they will roll out when the time comes. budget bills have to have bipartisan support. how can anything change when one side refuses to even negotiate? the republicans have used every procedural trick in the book and refused to negotiate or outright blocked debate and votes on nearly every debate this session. you can not tell me that that is a good thing and that it is not the republicans who have crippled the congress.

I don't think the Democrats are completely honest with their intentions of getting out of the middle east. Just look at all the continued Bush policies that the Obama administration allows. You'll be hard pressed to convince me that all these oppressive policies are maintained and extended purely because of pressure by Republicans. Things like the Patriot Act and FISA are supported by many democrats without any pressure by the Republicans required. How does this all apply to their intentions to cutting spending? It indirectly displays how the Democrats do agree with Republican positions and in some cases even build on them without any pressure by the Republicans at all.

You are right, though, they want to draw down, but drawing down to only a certain amount of troops stationed over there is still an expense we shouldn't be making. I digress, though, the Republicans do make it difficult to even draw down so I understand the problem there...like I said, Partisan Politics has us all fucked.

However, that's the only thing I'm aware of that the Democrats have attempted as far as your suggestions for spending cuts go. I haven't heard about them supporting anything to do with the Pentagon or Homeland Security cuts. If you have information to the contrary I'd be interested in reading it.

Jason P · December 2010

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Jason P wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

this thread is not just about taxes.

The thread isn't, but the recent discussion has been about taxes. My point was that the only thing that is certain is that either the entire populous or 10 million people are going to pay more money to the government if a compromise is not reached. And it seems as though when the tax issue is debated, other things like education, abortion, small business, and other hot-topic issues get thrown around instead of focusing on our government trying to take more money from us.

you view it as "taking money away from us". i view it as "paying into the system". there is a big difference there. as a citizen of this country it is my duty to pay taxes. it is your duty as well.

here is an idea, why not just do away with taxes? it seems that some people in this country are advocating that.

I already pay into the system, thus fulfilling my duty. It's a considerable amount. I wont sit around with my shoulders shrugged as they try to take more.

And what about the people who are being subsidized by the government? They are also citizens, so why isn't it their duty to pay into the system as well? I imagine that an argument could be that the system failed these people. If that logic holds true, then we have a broken system . . . so why pump more money into it until steps are made internally to fix the system?

unsung · December 2010

You want out of both wars?

Ron Paul 2012. That is your solution.

gimmesometruth27 · December 2010

Jason P wrote:

I already pay into the system, thus fulfilling my duty. It's a considerable amount. I wont sit around with my shoulders shrugged as they try to take more.

And what about the people who are being subsidized by the government? They are also citizens, so why isn't it their duty to pay into the system as well? I imagine that an argument could be that the system failed these people. If that logic holds true, then we have a broken system . . . so why pump more money into it until steps are made internally to fix the system?

why don't they pay into the system? because they have nothing to pay. some things you have to let go. that is like playing one on one with a handicapped kid and calling him for double dribble. sometimes you have to let some things slide.

your attitude in your post says to me yes just screw the less fortunate so you don't have to pay a few hundred more in taxes a year..."no fair!!!"
they don't pay much in taxes, so why should the rest of us, right? that is something i can get behind... :roll: they should go out and get themselves a job. well you know what? minimum wage jobs for uneducated and unskilled workers still pay a salary below the poverty level, so yes the system is screwed.

how often to you interact with poor people and how many would you say that you know? i am talking about working poor, those on medicaid, or those on disability medicare and medicaid. those that are on welfare so it holds up the check out line at the grocery store with the multiple transactions? you know, those people.. i deal with many many everyday in my job, since we are the only orthopedic physician's office in a 30 mile radius that takes medicaid and other forms of public aid.

this is where the all about me vs all about we argument stems from, and i know you guys hate that one, so i am not gonna play that card, even though this thread is about the republican party....how many of those republicans have reached out to those in need other than on the campaign trail? then when elected they treat them like dirt because the poor can not help contribute to the campaign coffers.

The Republican Party

Comments

Categories