118 visits to WH

Damocles said:
This is, again, quite literally an imaginary argument. Your side spends without regard to wisdom. The reality, nobody on "my side" has ever suggested that nobody should pay taxes. That is what you like to pretend. Your form of argument on this subject is the same as the form of tea in a child's tea party with her dolls. You imagine it exists, so you "battle" it.
Click to expand...

Yet, "your side" refuses any tax increase whatsoever even though taxes are lower than they have ever been. Its these incredibly low taxes that have led to the current economy.
 
Jarod said:
Yet, "your side" refuses any tax increase whatsoever even though taxes are lower than they have ever been. Its these incredibly low taxes that have led to the current economy.
Click to expand...

Rubbish. First spending cuts, a more efficient government then we'll talk about raising taxes. The answer to every problem is not "raise taxes" when Obama's own estimates are quite literally hundreds of billions of waste and abuse in his own branch of government. Work on that a bit and you'll find republicans far more willing to talk about "compromise".

The promise of spending cuts that will never come is no longer an enticement and cannot be used as one side of a "compromise", even republicans can figure out at some point that "your side" will not do what it has promised when it comes to reigning in unchecked growth of government.
 
Damocles said:
Rubbish. First spending cuts, a more efficient government. The answer to every problem is not "raise taxes".

The promise of spending cuts that will never come is no longer an enticement, even republicans can figure out at some point that "your side" will not do what it has promised when it comes to reigning in unchecked growth of government.
Click to expand...

Spending cuts should come BEFORE tax cuts. That's fiscal responsibility, alas the Republicans decided to do it the other way around and look what happened.

Borrow and spend is worse than tax and spend.
 
Damocles said:
Rubbish. First spending cuts, a more efficient government. The answer to every problem is not "raise taxes".

The promise of spending cuts that will never come is no longer an enticement, even republicans can figure out at some point that "your side" will not do what it has promised when it comes to reigning in unchecked growth of government.
Click to expand...


I love it when people who supported the Bush tax cuts (sans spending cuts, natch) lecture other people about this stuff. It's awesome.
 
Dungheap said:
I love it when people who supported the Bush tax cuts (sans spending cuts, natch) lecture other people about this stuff. It's awesome.
Click to expand...
Those who can't remember me pointing out that Bush overspent are "awesome"...

Reality: You are barking up the wrong tree here, DH. I was consistently speaking of Bush's out of control spending.
 
Damocles said:
Those who can't remember me pointing out that Bush overspent are "awesome"...
Click to expand...

You may have pointed it out, but you still supported the tax cuts WITHOUT spending cuts. A recipe for what we have now. And now, you are supporting a refusal to increase taxes unless we get spending cuts, which is only acerbating the problem.
 
Dungheap said:
Um, there were no spending cuts. You supported the tax cuts anyway. That's what happened.
Click to expand...

Again, you can't remember that I was almost constantly speaking of the insane spending levels of Bush... which, quite literally, is opposite to what you said I had done.

More reality: DH talked about Bush's insane spending levels, but supports spending at an even more insane level. That is "awesome"...
 
Jarod said:
You may have pointed it out, but you still supported the tax cuts WITHOUT spending cuts. A recipe for what we have now. And now, you are supporting a refusal to increase taxes unless we get spending cuts, which is only acerbating the problem.
Click to expand...

Again, utter BS. Although you too, like DH, complained about spending levels under Bush but support even more insane levels under Obama. And again, it is "awesome"...
 
Superfreak said:
Did ya read (and steal) that from the article?







Yeah, thought so. Then the question is, why did some occasions have 'healthcare' as the reason for the visit and others were left blank? Why would he continue to visit and not give a heads up to the WH after he knew of the targeting?
Click to expand...

Why would you give a fuck if you were not a shit stirring RNC shill?
 
Damocles said:
Again, you can't remember that I was almost constantly speaking of the insane spending levels of Bush... which, quite literally, is opposite to what you said I had done.

More reality: DH talked about Bush's insane spending levels, but supports spending at an even more insane level. That is "awesome"...
Click to expand...


LOL. Dude, you supported the Bush tax cuts. There were no accompanying spending cuts. That's what happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top