As predicted, folks are seeing they've been had
- Thread starter DamnYankee
- Start date
TuTu Monroe
A Realist
Oh, it was a change alright, but a change in the wrong direction and people are fuming.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
No its not, dummy!
Annie
Not So Junior Member
That would be the Democratic voters. Those that switched affiliation are concerned about the deficits, spending, and government control. Guess who elected hope & change? Not the Democrats.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
ibgayguy, don't you remember when Obama was elected, how happy you were? I was happy too, because I knew he would fail, causing the pendulum to swing back to its correct position. In fact, I encouraged liberals to push as far left as they could, because I knew it would hasten their demise as well as cause the pendulum to swing back further. And that is exactly what is happening. LOL
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
More evidence:
Gee, didn't Obama campaign for the 'rats in these two races?
Gee, didn't Obama campaign for the 'rats in these two races?
Good Luck
New member
While Pauline McAreavy is a poor example of a trend, (anyone who expected IMMEDIATE change is a hopeless idiot) I do believe that a large portion of independents who cast their vote on hope and change are beginning to realize what they are seeing is business as usual, if not more so. The promise of more transparency - a promise which COULD have been implemented more-or-less immediately - has been, quite obviously, completely tossed out the window. The same can be said for the promise of no higher taxes of any kind for anyone making less than $250,000 (or was that $200,000? ... $150,000? ... $150? ... $1.50?)
But, that is the way of it, especially as the two sides become more and more polarized. Independents will shift from one to the other, find they're disappointed, switch back, find even more disappointment, switch yet again, etc, etc, etc. The cycles are getting shorter, and the ranks of independents are growing. Eventually will come the time for a third party to step up to represent the collective interests of independents. It will be interesting when that happens, as historically it spells the end to one of the two major parties. Which party will be on the low end when the big switch is made? Or will we end up with TWO moderate new parties (one representing disaffected democrats and left leaning indies, the other representing disaffected republicans and right leaning indies), thus ending the move toward extremism of both current parties?
But, that is the way of it, especially as the two sides become more and more polarized. Independents will shift from one to the other, find they're disappointed, switch back, find even more disappointment, switch yet again, etc, etc, etc. The cycles are getting shorter, and the ranks of independents are growing. Eventually will come the time for a third party to step up to represent the collective interests of independents. It will be interesting when that happens, as historically it spells the end to one of the two major parties. Which party will be on the low end when the big switch is made? Or will we end up with TWO moderate new parties (one representing disaffected democrats and left leaning indies, the other representing disaffected republicans and right leaning indies), thus ending the move toward extremism of both current parties?
I'm still waiting for the extension of the Bush tax cuts that expire next year, specifically those that can effect people who make less than $250,000 per year, including the death taxes. How much somebody inherits does nothing to show how much they make per year, and that tax most certainly can effect people who make less than $250,000 per year.
I'm curious to see whether this President has the mandate strong enough to get the Ds to do what he promised, that "nobody under my Administration who makes less than $250,000 per year will see ANY kind of a tax increase..."
You and I agree, this is a "no new taxes" moment... Will the Ds extend those tax cuts, or are they resigned to only one term in the White House?
Obama has been specific on that; he has stated - both in the campaign & after - that he WILL NOT repeal the Bush cuts for those under $250K.
If he does, he has clearly broken a promise, and frankly, I'd be very disappointed. He'll also kill any chance he has for re-election, imo.
But, Good Luck has stated here that he has already broken the promise, and previously stated that Obama is taxing "everything that twitches." His is not an isolated case; it's repeated by talk radio, the TEA group, Republican politicians et al., to the point where it has become fairly ingrained.
It's like the "Saddam was behind 9/11" thing - repeat or imply it often enough, and it becomes belief in a significant portion of the population. I'd wager that if you did a poll right now, at least half of Americans would say that Obama has raised income taxes...
TuTu Monroe
A Realist
Obama has broken more than one promise already and I'm sure there will be more.
I'm asking specifically for proof that he broke his promise on income taxes. It keeps getting repeated here - and by you, as well, Tutu.
But when I ask for the proof - for the measure that raised our taxes, I get nuthin'....
Good Luck
New member
The comment on raising taxes on everything that twitches was not limited to income taxes. (hence "everything that twitches")
He's been in office for less than a year, so don't count him out yet on tax increases. In addition to the tobacco tax, federal taxes on alcohol have been raised, so that's two already in effect.
But try looking at what is being proposed, from increased gasoline taxes to a general tax on petroleum consumption affecting those who use fuel oil - A large percentage of which make less than $250,000 per year. (affects everyone, including with incomes less that $250,000)
And lets not forget cap and trade taxes, increased or additional taxes and/or fees on the health industry, and other proposals. (Not specifically a tax on people with less than $250,000, but will most definitely end up costing people who make less than $250,000, as well as being in the realm of things that twitch.)
He wants to bring back taxes on dividend income. And raise significantly corporate taxes, and individual income taxes on those making MORE than $250,000 - these also fall in the realm of everything that twitches.
But, in the end, it does not matter how MANY taxes he has raised (to date). The FACT is he promised that NO ONE who makes less than $250,000 per year would see ANY KIND of tax increase. (GEt it? As in NOT limited to income taxes as you keep trying to push - but we know THAT spin is just plain wrong.) It only takes ONE tax increase to make that a lie - and he has two. So stuff that in your pipe of liberal braindead ignorance and puff away. The promise has been broken, FACT and I hope it is repeated to the point of nausea in the next few years.
Last edited:
So, when you said he is taxing everything that twitches, you meant that he is taxing cigarettes and alcohol.
Okay. Thanks for the clarification on that....
If I even like the Hugo Obama as a person I would feel sorry for him cause he was probably told by his puppeteers that being President was going to be a piece of cake..
sorry Charlie, you lay with radical dogs you're bound to get radical fleas eating away at ya....
The Adolph Bush should have warned him how hard it was going to be.
I wonder if the Benito McCain would have fared better...
Good Luck
New member
He is PROPOSING taxes on everything that twitches - even health insurance (As if that is supposed to bring insurance costs down!). I listed a bunch of them for you. If you want to limit it to only those increases he has passed to date to make yourself feel better, go right ahead. I know you mindless little twits with your heads firmly planted up the donkeys ass need everything you can get these days to feel better.
Bottom line: he still broke his promise. I don't care if it was once or a dozen times (which it is likely to be by the 2012 election campaign) Your attempt to divert the attention of the topic to only income taxes has failed. Your attempt to minimize it to only passed bills while ignoring all the proposed tax increases currently on the table has also failed. Obama stated, quite emphatically, NO tax increases OF ANY KIND for those making less than $250,000, not just income taxes. You know that, and I know you know it despite your clever way of wording your question to spin it to just income taxes. He broke that promise twice in less 3 months. Give him 3 more years from today and we'll count up the number of times he breaks that promise then. (Though I am sure you'll have some lame assed excuse for every one.)
Sorry; you exaggerated wildly, and you got busted. I understand how you would feel embarassed about that; when people get embarassed, they tend to react in different ways. You clearly lose your temper & start hurling out names, hoping it will cover the tracks...
For the record, my understanding was always "income tax." When he's talking about ranges like $250K, and talking with guys like Joe the Plumber, that's how I understood it. I understood it to mean keeping the Bush tax cuts for that group, and not raising them.
To be honest, that is what is important to me. I think the tax rate is too high, anyway, and have always advocated for not just lower taxes, but a top tax rate of 33%. If Obama repeals the Bush cuts for everyone, or otherwise raises income taxes on the range specified, he pretty likely loses my vote (I say pretty likely, because I'll have to see what the alternatives are).
If you want to make hay out of things like cig & liquor taxes, be my guest; it's not how I took it, and it's not what is important to me.
To be honest, that is what is important to me. I think the tax rate is too high, anyway, and have always advocated for not just lower taxes, but a top tax rate of 33%. If Obama repeals the Bush cuts for everyone, or otherwise raises income taxes on the range specified, he pretty likely loses my vote (I say pretty likely, because I'll have to see what the alternatives are).
If you want to make hay out of things like cig & liquor taxes, be my guest; it's not how I took it, and it's not what is important to me.